Between Athens and Jerusalem: Jewish Identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora (The Biblical Resource Series)

THE BIBLICAL RESOURCE SERIES Available John J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, Second Edition John J. Colhns,...

Author: John Joseph Collins

251 downloads 1174 Views 13MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

THE

BIBLICAL

RESOURCE

SERIES

Available John J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, Second Edition John J. Colhns, Between Athens and Jerusalem: Jewish Identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora, Second Edition Frank Moore Cross, Jr., and David Noel Freedman, Studies in Ancient Yahwistic Poetry S. R. Driver, A Treatise on the Use of the Tenses in Hebrew and Some Other Syntactical Questions Joseph A. Fitzmyer, S.J., The Semitic Background of the New Testament (combined edition of Essays on the Semitic Background of the New Testament and A Wandering Aramean) Joseph A. Fitzmyer, S.J., To Advance the Gospel, Second Edition Birger Gerhardsson, Memory and Manuscript with Tradition and Transmission in Early Christianity Roland de Vaux, Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions

Between Athens and Jerusalem Jewish Identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora SECOND

EDITION

John J. Colhns

WILLIAM B . EERDMANS PUBLISHING COMPANY G R A N D RAPIDS, MICHIGAN / CAMBRIDGE, U . K . D O V E BOOKSELLERS LIVONIA, MICHIGAN

© 2000 Wni. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. All rights reserved Published jointly 2000 by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. 255 Jefferson Ave. S.E., Grand Rapids, Michigan 49503 / P.O. Box 163, Cambridge CB3 9PU U.K. and by Dove Booksellers 30633 Schoolcraft Road, Suite C, Livonia, Michigan 48150 Printed in the United Slates of America 05 04 03 02 01 00

7 6 5 4 3 2

ISBN 0-8028-4372-7

For John Strugnell Teacher and Friend

Contents

Preface

xii

Preface to the Second Edition

xiii

Abbreviations

xiv

Introduction

1

The Diaspora Setting

3

Gentile Perceptions of Judaism

6

Jewish Apologetics

14

Hellenistic Judaism and Judea

16

The Constraints of the Tradition

19

Relations with the Gentile Environment

24

Prospect

25

PART ONE NATIONAL AND POLITICAL IDENTITY 1. The Uses of the Past

29

The Faithful Chroniclers

33

Demetrius

33

The Followers of Demetrius

35

vii

viii

CONTENTS History and Romance

37

Artapanus

37

Eupolemus

46

Pseudo-Eupolemus?

47

Thallus and Cleodemus

51

Pseudo-Hecataeus

52

The Epic Poets

54

Philo

54

Theodotus

57

Jewish Historiography in the First Century C.E.

60

Conclusion

62

'

2. Religion and Politics: The Ptolemaic Era

64

The History of the Jews in Ptolemaic Egypt

64

Onias and Leontopolis

69

The Background of Onias

73

The Tale of the Tobiads

74

2 Maccabees and the Oniads

11

2 Maccabees and the Diaspora

78

The Third Sibyl

83

The Content of Sibylline Oracle 3

87

The Seventh King

88

The Analogy with the Persian Period

91

The King from the Sun

92

Jerusalem and the Gentile Kings

95

A Ptolemaic Messiah

95

The Provenance of Sibylline Oracle 3

96

The Letter of Aristeas

97

Joseph and Aseneth

103

Greek Esther

110

CONTENTS

3. Religion and Politics: The Roman Period

ix

113

The Status of the Jews in Roman Egypt

113

The Third Book of Maccabees

122

Philo's Politics

131

The Events of 66-73 C.E.

138

The Background of the Great Revolt

140

The Fifth Sibyl

143

The Later Sibyllines

150

Conclusion

151 *

PART TWO IDENTITY THROUGH ETHICS AND PIETY 4. The Common Ethic

155

Judaism according to Hecataeus

155

The Basis for a Common Ethic

157

The Sibylline Oracles

160

The Third Sibyl

160

Sibylline Oracle 5

165

Sibylline Oracle 4

166

The Sibylline Fragments

167

Pseudo-Phocy lides

168

The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs

174

The Testaments and the Covenant Form

177

The Content of the Exhortations

179

Homiletic Material in the Testaments

179

The Ethic of the Testaments

183

The Role of the Synagogue 5. Philosophical Judaism

184 186

Arlstobulus

186

Poetic Forgeries

190

X

CONTENTS

Pseudo-Aristeas

191

The Wisdom of Solomon

195

Fourth Maccabees

202

6. The Mysteries of God

210

Mystic Judaism

210

A Mystic Ritual?

211

Mystic Philosophy

214

Esotericism

217

Heavenly Revelations

219

The Pseudo-Orphic Fragments

219

Ezekiel the Tragedian

224

Joseph and Aseneth

230

Ritual Elements in Joseph and Aseneth?

232

Group Membership

234

The Episode of the Honeycomb

235

The Representative Roles of Joseph and Aseneth

236

A Corpus Permixtum

237

Lack of Sectarian Character

238

The Prayer of Joseph

239

The Testament of Job

240

The Struggle with Satan

242

The Confrontation with the Friends

243

The Role of the Women

244

The Religion of the Testament of Job

245

The Books of Adam and Eve

246

The Testament of Abraham

248

The Perspective on Death

250

The View of Judaism

251

2 Enoch The Hortatory Message

252 253

CONTENTS

3 Baruch

xi

255

The Attitude toward Jerusalem

257

A System of Individual Rewards

258

Conclusion

259

7. Jews and Gentiles

261

A Jewish Mission?

262

The "God-fearers"

264

The Function of the Literature

270

Conclusion

273

Bibliography

276

Indexes Subjects

303

Modem Authors

307

Ancient Literature

315

Preface

This study was undertaken as part of a research project on Normative SelfDefinition in Judaism and Christianity, funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. The project was coordinated by Professor E. P. Sanders of McMaster University. Responsibility for the area of Hellenistic Judaism was shared by Professors David Winston of the Graduate Theological Union, Berkeley, Professor Alan Mendelson of McMaster, and me. Professors Winston and Mendelson devoted their attention to the extensive corpus of Philo's writings, while I undertook to review the numerous minor authors of the Hellenistic Diaspora. This division of labor accounts for the most obvious lacuna in the present volume: the lack of a substantial discussion of Philo and his philosophical approach to Judaism. Such a discussion could scarcely have been incorporated in a single volume in any case. The lacuna will be filled by the forthcoming studies of Winston and Mendelson. I should like to express my gratitude to Professor Sanders, McMaster University, and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada for the support which made this book possible; to Professors Winstbn and Mendelson for their advice and cooperation at all stages of the project; and to Professor Thomas H. Tobin, S.J., of Loyola University, Chicago, for his helpful comments on the manuscript. Professor John Strugnell first introduced me to the fragmentary Hellenistic Jewish writings in a memorable seminar at Harvard Divinity School in Spring 1970. This book is dedicated to him in gratitude and friendship.

xii

Preface to the Second Edition

Fifteen years have passed between the pubHcation of the first edition of this book and the completion of the revision. During this period there has been an outpouring of secondary literature on the subject. Notable contributions have included the annotated translations in volume 2 of The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, edited by James Charlesworth; the comprehensive review of the literature by Martin Goodman in the revised edition of Schiirer's History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ; editions of the fragmentary Jewish authors by Carl HoUaday; and the recent monographs of John Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora (1996) and Erich Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism (1998). The revision of this book is primarily a matter of updating the discussion in the footnotes, but this has also required numerous changes in the text. The main expansions of the original text can be found in Chapter 2, on the Ptolemaic era; Chapter 3, on the Roman era; and Chapter 7, on the questions of a Jewish mission and the existence of the God-fearers. I would like to thank the staff at Eerdmans, and especially Dan Harlow, for making this revised edition possible.

xni

Abbreviations

AB ABD Ag. Ap. AGJU AnBib ANRW Ant. Ap. Const. APOT BA BASOR BBB BETL Bib BJRL BJS BZNW CBA CBQ CBQMS CIJ CPJ CRINT CTM

Anchor Bible Anchor Bible Dictionary Josephus, Against Apion Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und Urchristentums Analecta biblica Aufstieg und Niedergang der romischen Welt, ed. W. Haase and H. Temporini (Beriin: de Gruyter) Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews Apostolic Constitutions Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, 2 vols.; ed. R. H. Charles (Oxford: Clarendon, 1913) Biblical Archaeologist Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research Bonner biblische Beitrage Bibliotheca ephemeridum theologicarum lovaniensium Biblica Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester Brown Judaic Studies Beihefte zur Zeitschrift fiir die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft Catholic Biblical Association Catholic Biblical Quarterly Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series Corpus inscriptionum judaicarum Corpus papyrorum judaicarum Compendia rerum iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum Concordia Theological Monthly XiV

ABBREVIATIONS

CQ DJD ET ETL FGH FRLANT GCS HDR Hist. Eccl. HR HSM HTR HTS HUCA lEJ JAAR JAOS JBL JJS JR JRS JSHRZ JSJ JSNT JSOTSup JSP JSPSup JTS J.W. KBW LXX NovT NovTSup NRTh NTS NumenSup OBO OCD OTP

Classical Quarterly Discoveries in the Judaean Desert Expository Times Ephemerides theologicae lovanienses Fragmenta der griechischen Historiker, ed. F. Jacoby Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments Griechische christiiche Schriftsteller Harvard Dissertations in Religion Eusebius, Historia Ecclesiastica History of Religions Harvard Semitic Monographs Harvard Theological Review Harvard Theological Studies Hebrew Union College Annual Israel Exploration Journal Journal of the American Academy of Religion Journal of the American Oriental Society Journal of Biblical Literature Journal of Jewish Studies Journal of Religion Journal of Roman Studies Judische Schriften aus hellenistisch-romischer Zeit Journal for the Study of Judaism Journal for the Study of the New Testament Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha Supplement Series Journal of Theological Studies Josephus, The Jewish War Katholisches Bibelwerk Septuagint Novum Testamentum Supplements to Novum Testamentum La nouvelle revue theologique New Testament Studies Supplements to Numen Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis Oxford Classical Dictionary The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, 2 vols.; ed. J. H. Charlesworth (New York: Doubleday, 1983-85)

XV

XVI

PG PGM PL Praep. Evang. PVTG PWRE PWRESup RAG RB REJ RHR SANE SBLASP SBLDS SBLMS SBS SC SCS Sib. Or. SJLA SUNT SNTS SPCK SUNT SVF SVTP TAPA TDNT TU TZ VC Vita VT WMANT WUNT ZAW ZDPV ZNW ZTK ZRGG

ABBREVIATIONS

Pairologia graeca, ed. J. Migne Papyri graecae magicae, ed. K. Preisendanz Patrologia latlna, ed. J. Migne Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica Pseudepigrapha Veteris Testamenti graece Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encyclopddie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft Supplement to Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encyclopddie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft Reallexikon fiir Antike und Christentum Revue biblique Revue des etudes juives Revue de I'histoire des religions Studies in the Ancient Near East Society of Biblical Literature Abstracts and Seminar Papers Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series Society of Biblical Literature Monograph Series Stuttgarter Bibelstudien Sources chretiennes Septuagint and Cognate Studies Sibylline Oracles Studies in Judaism in Late Antiquity Studien zur Umwelt des Neuen Testaments Studiorum Novi Testamenti Societas Society for the Promotion of Christian Knowledge Studien zur Umwelt des Neuen Testaments Stoicorum veterum fragmenta, ed. H. F. A. von Arnim Studia in Veteris Testamenti Pseudepigrapha Transactions of the American Philological Association Theological Dictionary of the New Testament Texte und Untersuchungen Theologische Zeitschrift Vigiliae Christianae Josephus, Life Vetus Testamentum Wissenschaftliche Monographien zum Alten und Neuen Testament Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament Zeitschrift fur die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft Zeitschrift des deutschen Paldstina-Vereins Zeitschrift fiir die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft Zeitschrift fur Theologie und Kirche Zeitschrift fiir Religions- und Geistesgeschichte

Introduction

How shall we sing the song of the LORD in a foreign land? Ps. 137:4 The plaintive question of the psalmist by the waters of Babylon is a moving testimony to the ageless homesickness of the exile and the depth of human longing to be rooted in a specific place which can be recognized as home. It is also a classic expression of one of the major problems of Jewish history. The "song of the LORD" was primarily the recitation of the mighty acts of Yahweh, the story of how Israel had come to exist as a people and to occupy the promised land. It was not only the song of the Lord, but the story of the people. Religion and national identity went hand in hand, and both were deeply rooted in the land of Israel itself. For much of the history of Israel, the identity of the people had been shaped and supported by a number of complementary factors — common territory, political loyalty, ethnic continuity, common language, religious observance, and tradition. After the exile, the people was scattered geographically, subject to various political authorities, and diverse in language. Religious tradition and observance assumed an ever greater role in maintaining distinctive identity. Even ethnic considerations were subordinated In importance, in the case of proselytes and renegades. The problem of singing the song of the Lord in a foreign land was the problem of maintaining the identity of the people and its survival as a distinct entity. Identity, whether of a people or of an individual, is a matter of knowing who one is, where one is coming from, and where one is going. Such knowledge is a practical necessity if one is to proceed to any purposeful action in 1

2

INTRODUCTION

life.' But such knowledge is inevitably shaped by social context. It is "a social-scientific platitude to say that it is impossible to become or to be human, in any empirically recognizable form that goes beyond biological observations, except in society."^ Peter Berger has gone so far as to say that "the individual becomes that which he is addressed as by others."^ This is undoubtedly an oversimplification, if only because any individual is likely to be addressed in conflicting ways, but Berger's valid point is that the identity of any individual is built up in interaction with others and must be confirmed by others if it is not to be merely idiosyncratic or solipsistic. Any society must provide the framework within which individuals can share a common view of reality and confirm each other's convictions as to where they are coming from and where they are going. Society "provides a world for man to inhabit"* by propagating common assumptions about the nature and purpose of life, and institutions which regulate common modes of action.^ These assumptions and institutions are frequently religious in character, both in the sense that they are concerned with ultimate reality and in the more obvious sense that they involve the worship of divine beings.^ In the ancient world in general, and in Israel in particular, the dominant beliefs and institutions were explicitly religious and were embodied in traditions passed on from generation to generation. The power of such traditions to shape the identity of people derives from the fact that they are commonly taken as objective reality, within a given society.'' If they are to function at all, they must at least be plausible enough to the members of the society to retain their belief. Now plausibility depends to a great extent on social and cultural support. Few people question what everyone else takes for granted. By contrast, any group that holds unusual views is inevitably under pressure to establish Its plausibility, not only to win the respect of outsiders, but primarily to maintain the allegiance of its own members. 1. See J. Bowker, The Religious Imagination and the Sense of God (Oxford: Clarendon, 1978) 17. 2. P, Berger, The Sacred Canopy. Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion (Garden City: Doubleday. 1969) 16. See also P. Berger and T. Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality (Garden City: Doubleday, 1967). 3. Berger, The Sacred Canopy. 16. 4. Ibid., 13. 5. That these assumptions are not just objective data but are constructed or invented has been stressed by U. 0stergard, "What Is National and Ethnic Identity?" in P. Bilde et al., eds., Ethnicity in Hellenistic Egypt (Aarhus: Aarhus University Press, 1992) 16-38, following B. Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism (London: Verso, 1983). 6. Berger, The Sacred Canopy, 27: "Viewed historically, most of man's worlds have been sacred worlds." 7. Clifford Geertz, in liis well-known definition of religion, speaks of "an aura of factuality" which makes its moods and motivations "seem uniquely realistic" ("Religion as a Cultural System," in idem. The Interpretation of Cultures [New York: Basic Books, 1973] 88-125).

INTRODUCTION

3

T h e Diaspora Setting The basic problem in the Jewish Diaspora was how to maintain the Jewish tradition in an environment dominated by Gentiles. Quite apart from actual persecution, which was extremely rare before the Hellenistic age,^ the very juxtaposition of diverse beliefs challenged the plausibility of minority views. The people who made up the majority in Babylon and other centers of exile were, for better or worse, "significant others,"^ and Jewish identity would inevitably be modified by interaction with them. In the case of the Babylonian exile, the crisis of plausibility was especially severe, since the exile was an enforced one, and might be attributed to Yahweh's inability to protect his people: "We have become a taunt to our neighbors, mocked and derided by those round about u s . . . . Why should the nations say, 'Where is their God?'" (Ps. 79:4, 10). Yet the very direct threat to the traditional Jewish faith entailed a certain simplicity. At least in the beginning, the lines of conflict were clearly drawn and invited firm, unambiguous decisions. The situation was different in the Diaspora of the Hellenistic age. The Jews were no longer exiles against their will; their exile was no longer a cause of derision. Already in the Babylonian exile, there were many who heeded the advice of Jeremiah to "seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the Lord on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare.""^ At the time of the restoration under the Persians, not all the Jews in Babylon chose to return.'' Jewish communities persisted and flourished in Babylonia throughout the Hellenistic and Roman periods.'^ The Jewish Diaspora in the West did not originate in compulsory exile at all. At the time of the conquest of Judah by the Babylonians, many of the "remnants of the nation" (Jer. 41:16) sought refuge in Egypt, and even the prophet Jeremiah was taken along despite his protests.'^ The community at Elephan-

8. Josephus (Ag. Ap, 1.191) cites Hecataeus as saying that the Jews were subjected to religious persecution by the Persians. The authenticity of the passage is disputed. 9. Berger (The Sacred Canopy, 16) states: 'The world is built up in the consciousness of the individual by conversation with significant others." 10. Jer. 29:7. See W. Lee Humphreys, "A Life-Style for Diaspora: A Study of the Tales of Esther and Daniel," JBL 92 (1973) 211-23. 11. See J. Bright. A History of Israel (2d ed.; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1972) 363. Josephus (Ant. 11.1.3 §8) says that "many remained in Babylon, being unwilling to leave their possessions." 12. See J. Neusner, A History of the Jews in Babylonia, 1 (Leiden: Brill, 1965); M. Stem, 'The Jewish Diaspora," in S. Safrai and M. Stem, eds.. The Jewish People in the First Century (CRINT 1.1; Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974) 170-80. 13. Jeremiah 41-44. Bright, History, 346; B. Oded, "Judah and the Exile," in J. H. Hayes and J. M. Miller, eds., Israelite and Judaean History ( Philadelphia: Westminster, 1977) 486-

4

INTRODUCTION

tine, which survived for over a hundred years, had apparently originated in a voluntary migration to serve as mercenaries.'* It is possible that some of those who went down to Egypt in the time of Ptolemy I were coerced,'^ but the subsequent growth of the Jewish community in Egypt and throughout the Hellenistic world was not due to any external compulsion. The Jewish population of Egypt grew steadily in the third century B.C.E., when Palestine was under Ptolemaic rule and there was constant commercial intercourse between the two countries.'^ Similarly, a large Jewish population arose in neighboring Syria.^^ There was a major migration of Jews to Egypt in the wake of the Maccabean revolt, including Onias IV and his supporters,'^ and there is some 14. See A. Cowley, Aramaic Papyri of the Fifth Century BC (London: Oxford, 1923); E. G. Kraeling, The Brooklyn Museum Aramaic Papyri (New Haven: Yale, 1953); B. Porten, Archives from Elephantine: The Life of an Ancient Jewish Militaiy Colony (Berkeley: University of California Press. 1968); "Elephantine Papyri," ABD, 2:445-55; B. Porten and A. Yardeni. Textbook of Ancient Aramaic Documents from Ancient Egypt {3 vols.; Jerusalem: Hebrew University; Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns. 1986-92); J. M. Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt: From Rameses II to Emperor Hadrian (Princeton: Princeton University Press. 1995) 21 44. The Jews claimed to have lived at Elephantine prior to the Persian conquest of Egypt in 525 B.C.E. The garrison disappears from view shortly after 400 B.C.E. 15. See V. Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization and the Jews (New York: Atheneum. 1970) 269-73. The Letter of Aristeas (\2-\4) tells of 100,000 Jewish captives brought to Egypt under Ptolemy I, of whom some 30,000 were placed in garrisons. The historical value of this evidence is questionable; at least the numbers are inflated. Tcherikover, however, accepts "that the Jewish diaspora in Hellenistic Egypt began under Ptolemy I, and that the vast majority of the Jews left their native country not of their free will but under compulsion." Josephus cites Hecataeus for the view that Jews (including a high priest Hezekiah) followed Ptolemy willingly, but the authenticity of the passage is disputed (Ag. Ap. 1.186-87). Josephus's own claim that the Jews came to Egypt under Alexander and were given equal rights with the Greeks (Ag. Ap. 2.35; J.W. 2.487) is widely rejected. 16. V. A. Tcherikover and A. Fuks, eds.. Corpus Papyrorum Iudaicarum (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. 1957) 1:1-3 (henceforth CPJ). Tcherikover notes that Jewish migration was part of a wider phenomenon of Syrian migration and that there was an active trade in slaves. See also A. Kasher, The Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt (Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck. 1985) 1-7. 17. Josephus, J.W. 7.3.3 §§44-45. C. H. Kraeling. "The Jewish Community at Antioch." JBL5\ (1932) 130-60; W. A. Meeks and R. L. Wilken, Jews and Christians in Antioch in the First Four Centuries of the Common Era (Sources for Biblical Study 13, Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1978) 2-5. For an overview of the history of Jewish communities in the Diaspora, see Stern, "The Jewish Diaspora," 117-83; E. Schurer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 B.C.-A.D. 135) (rev, and ed. G. Vermes, F. Millar, and M. Goodman; 3 vols.; Edinburgh: Clark, 1973-87) 3.1:1-176. Noteworthy studies of particular areas include H. J. Leon, The Jews of Ancient Rome (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1960) L. V. Rutgers, The Jews in Late Ancient Rome (Leiden: Brill, 1995); A. T. Kraabel, "Judaism in Western Asia Minor under the Roman Empire" (Dissertation, Harvard University, 1968) S. K-^^\thAum, Jews and Greeks in Ancient Cyrene (SJLA 28; Leiden: Brill. 1979); P. Trebilco Jewish Communities in Asia Minor (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991); J. M. G Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora from Alexander to Trajan (323 BCE-II7CE) (Edinburgh: Clark. 1996) 231-58 (Cyrenaica and Syria), 259-81 (Asia), 282-319 (Rome). 18. Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 121-33; Jerome (On Daniel 11:13-14, Patrologia Latina 25.562): "Onias sacerdos,' assumptis Judaeorum plurimis, fugit in Aegyptum"; ibid., 563: "sub occasione ergo Oniae pontificis. infmita examine Judaeorum Aegyptum confu-

INTRODUCTION

5

evidence that the political enemies of the Hasmoneans continued to seek refuge t h e r e . B y the first century C.E., Philo could claim that "the Jews dwelling in Alexandria and Egypt from the Libyan slope to the borders of Aethiopia do not fall short of a million" and that "no single country can contain the Jews because of their multitude."^^ While Philo's figures are not reliable,2' there is no doubt that the Jewish population had grown vast. While the general impression from the papyri "is that of a hard-working people earning its living by tenacious labour," there were many who prospered, and no branch of economic life was closed to them.^'^ It is evident from the literature of the Diaspora that at least some Jews were educated, by whatever means, in Greek literature and philosophy.The open attitude of the Diaspora Jews to their Hellenistic environment is amply shown in their use of Greek names and their recourse to Hellenistic law.^* The struggle of the Jews in Alexandria for parity with the Greek citizens typifies the aspirations of the Hellenistic Diaspora. The Hellenistic Jews were not reluctant exiles. They were attracted by Hellenistic culture, eager to win the respect of the Greeks and to adapt to their ways. gerunt." Tcherikover comments on the "infmita examine": "even taking into consideration the usual tendency of ancient authors to exaggerate numbers . . . we may infer that the number of new immigrants from Judaea was certainly considerable" (CPJ 1:2). 19. 1 Mace, 15:16-21 cites a letter from a Roman consul to the reigning Ptolemy, which asks that "if any pestilent men have fled to you from their coimtry hand them over to Simon, the high priest, that he may punish them according to their law." If the letter is genuine, the consul is Lucius Calpurnius Piso in 140-139 B.C.E. and the Ptolemy is Euergetes II Physcon. See Tcherikover, CPJ 1:3. Tcherikover also notes a Talmudic tale concerning a Pharisaic leader who fled to Egypt from a Sadducean king. 20. Philo, In Flaccum 43, 45. Cf De Vita Mosis 2.232; Legalio ad Gahtin 214. 245. Also Hecataeus in Diodorus Siculus 40.3, 8 and Strabo, Geography 16.2, 28. See Stern, "The Jewish Diaspora," 117. 21. There was no enumeration of Jews until the introduction of the Jewish tax in 71-72 C.E., so there were no exact figures available to Philo. L. H. Feldman, Jew and Gentile in the Ancient World (Princeton: Princeton University Press. 1993) 293, 555-56, is exceptional in defending the reliability of the figures given by Philo and other ancient authors. 22. Tcherikover, CPJ 1:19. For an overview see S. Applebaum, "The Social and Economic Status of Jews in the Diaspora," in S. Safrai and M. Stern, eds.. The Jewish People in the First Cenluiy (CRINT 1.2; Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976) 701-27. There was apparently a very large class of Jewish slaves in Rome, and the Roman satirists repeatedly mock Jewish poverty, but even there many Jews were well-to-do. 23. Feldman, Jew and Gentile, 57-63; Tcherikover, CPJ 1:38-39, In the Ptolemaic period the gymnasia were in private hands, and it would seem that no special qualifications were needed for entry. In Tcherikover's view, Jewish access to the gymnasia was a major point of contention in the time of Caligula, On the other hand, A. Kasher ("The Jewish Attitude to the Alexandrian Gymnasium in the First Century A . D . , " American Journal of Ancient Histoiy 1 [ 1976] 148-61) denies that Jews even wanted access to the gymnasium and holds that they were hostile to it. See also Kasher, The Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt 310-21. 24. Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt. 99-119; Tcherikover, CPJ 1:27-36, The recourse to Hellenistic law is noteworthy because there was an autonomous Jewish tribunal in Alexandria.

6

INTRODUCTION

Gentile Perceptions of J u d a i s m Yet the Jews were a distinct people with their own peculiar traditions, and a certain degree of tension was inevitable. The tension arose from both sides. Greek interest in Judaism was superficial. In the period immediately after Alexander's conquests, a number of Greek historians and philosophers wrote on the Jews (Hecataeus of Abdera, Theophrastus, Megasthenes, Clearchus of Soli). Their attitude was respectful, determined by Greek stereotypes of eastem peoples rather than by observation. However, when the actual Jewish scriptures became available in Greek translation, they were i g n o r e d . I n general, the Greeks of the Hellenistic age looked upon Judaism as a strange superstition.^^ Agatharcides of Cnidus in Asia Minor, writing in the mid-second century B.C.E., claimed that Jerusalem had fallen to Ptolemy I Lagus because of the Jewish observance of the Sabbath, and he regarded this as a prime illustration of the folly of superstition.^^ Another second-century writer from Asia Minor, Mnaseas, alleged that the Jews worshipped an ass's head.^^ It is unlikely that Mnaseas invented the story. It is embedded in an account of a conflict between the Idumeans and the Jews and may have been derived from Idumean propaganda. In any case, the story was designed to 25. A. Momigiiaiio, Alien Wisdom (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975) 7496 ("The Hellenistic Discovery of Judaism"). 26. M. Stern, Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism (3 vols.; Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1974-84); idem, "The Jews in Greek and Latin Literature," in S. Safrai and M. Stern, eds.. The Jewish People in the First Century (CRINT 1.2; Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976) 1101-59, J. N. Sevenster, The Roots of Pagan Anti-Semitism in the Ancient Vyor/d (NovTSup 41; Leiden: Brill, 1975); J. L. Daniel, "AntiSemitism in the Hellenistic Roman Period," JBL 98 (1979) 45-65; J. G. Gager, The Origins of Anti-Semitism (New York: Oxford University Press, 1983) 55-59; M. Whittaker, Jews and Christians: Greco-Roman Views (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984); M. Goodman, "Apologetics: The Literary Opponents," in Schiirer, The History of the Jewish People. 3.1:594-609; C. Aziza, "L'Utilisation polemique du recit de I'Exode chez les ecrivains alexandrins (IVeme siecle av. J.-C.-Ier sifecle ap. J.-C," in W. Haase, ed., Aufstieg und Niedergang der Romischen Welt. II. Principal. Band 20/1: Religion (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1987) 41-65; E. Gabba, "The Growth of Anti-Judaism or the Greek Attitude towards. Jews," in W. D. Davies and L, Finkelstein, eds., Tiie Cambridge Histoiy of Judaism. Volume 2: The Hellenistic Age (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989) 614-56; Feldman, Jew and Gentile, 12376; P. Schafer, Judeophobia (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1997) 15-118. 21.Ag.Ap. 1.209-12; Am. 12.1.1 §§5-6. 28. Ag. Ap. 2.112-14. 29. See E. J. Bickerman, "Ritualmord und Eselskult," in Studies in Jewish and Christian History (3 vols.; AGJU 9; Leiden: Brill, 1976-86) 2:225-55 (originally published in Monatsschrift fur Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentums 71 [1927]). See however the discussion by Schafer, Judeophobia, 55-62, and B. Bar-Kochva, "The Ass in the Jerusalem Temple," in L. H. Feldman and J. R. Levison, eds., Josephus' Contra Apionem: Studies in Its Character and Context with a Latin Concordance to the Portion Missing iti Greek (Leiden: Brill, 1996) 310-26, who point out that the ass was associated with Seth-Typhon, and that the association of the Jews with Typhon is an Egyptian motif that can be traced back to Manetho (about 300 B . C . E . ) . See also J. W. van Henten and R. Abusch, "The Depiction of the Jews as

INTRODUCTION

7

ridicule the Jews and could only augment their reputation for superstition. We learn from Josephus that the Egyptian polemicist Apion drew material for his ridicule of the Jews from Posidonius and Apollonius Molon.^"* These were two of the great men of their age. Posidonius of Apamea in Syria (13551 B.C.E.) was a philosopher, historian, scientist, and prolific writer. Unfortunately, his work is almost completely lost, and attempts to reconstruct his thought from others who may have been influenced by him have been controversial. Consequently we can say little about his attitude to the Jews.^^ Apollonius Molon was a rhetorician who came from Caria but taught in Rhodes and numbered Cicero and Julius Caesar among his disciples. According to Josephus, Posidonius and Apollonius "charge us with not worshipping the same gods as other people" and "tell lies and invent absurd calumnies about our temple." He goes on to specify the calumnies about the temple: the story of the ass's head and the allegation that the Jews annually murdered a Greek. Josephus is responding to the polemic of Apion, and it is not certain whether these charges were already found in Posidonius and Apollonius. According to Josephus, Apollonius has not grouped his accusations together, but scattered them here and there all over his work, reviling us in one place as atheists and misanthropes, in another reproaching us as cowards, whereas elsewhere, on the contrary, he accuses us of temerity and reckless madness. He adds that we are the most witless of all barbarians and are consequently the only people who have contributed no useful invention to civilization.^'^ Apollonius was the first Greek writer after Hecataeus who was said to have written a special book on the Jews. The fragment of the book preserved by Alexander Polyhistor does not show a bias against the Jews but associates their origin with Syria.''^ We may suspect that his tirades against the Jews were rhetorical in character. None of these writers necessarily had a great interest in Judaism, and the remarks at which Josephus took offense may have been made quite casually. ApollonJus's distinguished pupil, Cicero, also inveighed against the Jews in two orations: his defense of Flaccus and "On the Consular ProvTyphonians and Josephus' Strategy of Refutation in Contra Apionem," in Feldman and I^vison, eds., Josephus' Contra Apionem, 271-309. 30. Ag. Ap. 2.79. 31. Stern, "The Jews in Greek and Latin Literature," 1123-25. For the fragments of Posidonius, see L. Edelstein and I. G. Kidd, Posidonius I: Tiie Fragments (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1972). Zl.Ag. Ap. 2.147. 33. Eusebius, Praep. Evang. 9.19.1-3.

8

INTRODUCTION

inces." He characterizes the Jewish religion as superstition and contrasts it with the traditional religion of Rome. In his speech "On the Consular Provinces" he says that the Syrians and Jews were bom to slavery. It has been pointed out, however, that ridiculing the enemy was a standard rhetorical tactic of Cicero. In the defense of Flaccus he also denounces the cities of Asia Minor, and elsewhere he ridicules the Sardi and the Gauls. Cicero was not motivated by any direct animosity toward the Jews, although one might infer from his speeches a general lack of respect for remote and alien peoples. The Roman attitude to the Jews around the turn of the era is perhaps best reflected in the gibe of Horace credat ludaeus Apella}^ The Jew was assumed to be credulous because of his strange beliefs. Later Roman writers were in general more hostile.Seneca's attitude to the Jews followed from his general resentment of the spread of eastern cults in Rome. He directed his criticisms at Jewish ritual and ceremonial in order to show the superstitious, irrational nature of the cult (e.g., that the Sabbath observance wasted a seventh of a person's life). Seneca paid no attention to the moral side of Jewish religion. This was also true of the satirists of the later first and early second centuries. Persius ridiculed the Sabbath. Petronius regarded circumcision as the main mark of the Jew and alleged that the pig was the Jewish deity. Martial comments on circumcision and the Sabbath. Juvenal stresses the Sabbath, circumcision, and abstention from pork. The relatively extensive comments of Tacitus are introduced in the context of the destruction of Jemsalem by Rome, but he does not denounce or even blame the Jews for their rebellion.^^ His dislike for Judaism was due to the same cause as that of Seneca and Juvenal. He resented the spread of Judaism and other eastern cults in Rome. Judaism, then, appeared as a strange phenomenon with unfamiliar rites and observances in the Hellenistic and Roman world. As such it was liable to caricature and mockery and also to suspicion and occasional hostility. In Egypt another dimension was added to this. Both Jews and Gentiles agreed that the origin of the Jewish people had involved an exodus out of Egypt. Hecataeus of Abdera, writing at the beginning of the Hellenistic period, reported that in ancient times a pestilence broke out in Egypt and the Egyptians decided to drive out the foreigners who were living there. The best of these made their home in Greece, but the greater number settled in Judea, which 34. Stem, "The Jews in Greek and Latin Literature," 1144-45; B. Wardy, "Jewish Religion in Pagan Literature during the Late Republic and Early Empire," ANRW 2.19.1 (1979) 592-613. 35. Horace, Satires 1.5.100. See further Daniel, "Anti-Semitism." 54-57. 36. Stem, "The Jews in Greek and Latin Literature," 1150-59; Gager, The Origins of Anti-Semitism, 58-59, attributes the increased hostility to the Jewish war of 66-73 C.E. and the success of Jewish proselytism. 37. See further Wardy, "Jewish Religion in Pagan Literature," 613-35.

INTRODUCTION

9

was uninhabited.^^ The distinction between those who settled in Greece and the founders of Judea reflects a Greek sense of superiority, but it was not necessarily meant to disparage the Judeans. Hecataeus goes on to say that Moses was outstanding for his wisdom and courage, although the way of life he established was "somewhat unsocial and hostile to foreigners." Hecataeus was neither pro- nor a n t i - J e w i s h . H e was simply reporting the rather muddled account of Jewish origins that he had picked up, presumably in Egypt. Elements of this account reappear in passages that Josephus attributes to Manetho, an Egyptian priest who undertook to write an account of Egyptian antiquity in Greek in the third century B.C.E. Josephus distinguishes two elements in Manetho's account. First, he claims that Jerusalem was founded by the Hyksos, Asiatic rulers who had ruled Egypt with great cruelty for a time, but were eventually driven out.^'* Thus far, says Josephus, Manetho followed the chronicles. But Josephus says that he goes on, "under the pretext of recording fables and current reports about the Jews" to give another account, set at a later period. A king named Amenophis collected all the lepers and other polluted persons, and sent them to work in the stone quarries. Eventually they were allowed to go to Avaris, the old Hyksos capital, which is said to be sacred to Typhon. They appointed as leader one of the priests of Heliopolis called Osarsiph. He forbade the worship of the gods and ordered his followers to kill and consume sacred animals and to have no connection with people outside their own group. He then persuaded the shepherds (the Hyksos) to return to Egypt. The king fled to Ethiopia with the sacred animals. Osarsiph, who is explicitly identified with Moses, terrorized Egypt and committed outrages against the sacred animals and the priests.'*^ The authenticity of this second account has long been disputed.^^ There is wide agreement that an old tradition about the Hyksos has been secondarily applied to the Jews, whether by Manetho or by a later writer, and the identification of Osarsiph with Moses appears to be a secondary addition. 38. Hecataeus, Aegyptiaca, in Diodorus Siculus, Bibliotheca Historica 40.3; Stem, Greek and Latin Authors, 26-35. For a discussion of Hecataeus see R M. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria (Oxford: Clarendon, 1972) 1:496-504; G. E. Sterling, Historiography and Self-Definition: Josephos, Luke Acts and Apologetic Historiography (Leiden: Brill, 1992) 59-91; B. Bar-Kochva, Pseudo-Hecataeus 'On the Jews': legitimizing the Jewish Diaspora (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996) 7-43. 39. So rightly E. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism: The Reinvention of Jewish Tradition (Berkeley: University of Califomia Press, 1998) 52. 40. Ag. Ap. 1.75-90; 228. AX.Ag.Ap. 1.232-50. 42. E. Meyer, Agyptische Chronologic (Berlin: Societas regia scientiarum, 1904) 71-79. See J. G. Gager, Moses in Greco-Roman Paganism (SBLMS 16; Nashville: Abingdon, 1972) 116. For a summary of recent literature on the debate, see M. Pucci Ben Zeev, "The Reliability of Josephus Flavins: The Case of Hecataeus' and Manetho's Accounts of Jews and Judaism: Fifteen Years of Contemporary Research (1974-1990)," JSJ 24 (1993) 215-34.

10

INTRODUCTION

The association with the Hyksos was not necessarily designed to discredit the Jews, even though it cast them in a very bad light from an Egyptian point of view. It may have been simply a way to account for the origin of this distinctive people, and to explain where the Hyksos went when they were expelled from Egypt.*^ This account of Jewish origins was adapted with minor variations by a succession of authors: Chaeremon, Lysimachus, and Aplon.^* Chaeremon has a version of the Exodus story resembling that of Manetho, but he refrains from derogatory comments about the Jews. Both Lysimachus and Apion, however, who were active during the early Roman period, have a clear antiJewish animus. Lysimachus claimed that Jerusalem was named Hierosyla (from the Greek phrase for plundering a temple) because of the sacrilegious acts of the founders. Apion wrote a treatise "Against the Jews." The Egyptian version of Jewish origins also circulated outside of Egypt and left a clear imprint in Tacitus. Anti-Jewish polemic reached its apex in Alexandria in the first century C.E., where Apion drew together the various historical and moral allegations hostile to the Jews. This polemic is mainly preserved in selective quotations in Josephus's Against Apion. While Josephus may have caused some distortion, however, there Is no doubt about the reality of anti-Jewish polemic in Alexandria in the first century C.E. One of the most basic and persistent of these allegations was that the Jews were misanthropic, hostile to the rest of humankind.^^ Hecataeus noted that the laws of Moses, whom he had praised for wisdom and courage, differ from those of other nations "for as a result of their own expulsion from Egypt he introduced a way of life that was somewhat unsocial and hostile to foreigners (apanthrdpon tina kai misoxenon bion)^^ Manetho's Osarsiph ordered his followers to avoid contact with outsiders. Apollonius Molon characterized the Jews as "atheists and misanthropes.'"*^ The same charge is found in Diodorus Siculus,"*^ who reports that king Antiochus VII Sidetes 43. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 49, makes the sensible observation that "the episode of the Exodus held a central place in Jewish consciousness and the self-perception of Jews. But only for them. Writers of the Greco-Roman world had no comparable stake in the matter." His own hypothesis that Hellenistic Jews had invented the story of the violent overthrow of Egypt by their ancestors as a matter of Jewish pride (pp. 63-64) is gratuitous and highly implausible. The story is always seen as negative, both by Jewish and Gentile authors. The idea that the identification of the shepherds and the Jews derives from a Jewish source was suggested by L. Troiani, "Sui frammenti di Manetone nel primo libro del Contra Apionem di Flavio Giuseppe," Sludi Classici e Orientali 24 (1975) 97-126 and Gabba, 'The Growth of Anti-Judaism," 634. 44.Ag.Ap. 1,288-320; 2,1-7; Stem, Greek and Latin Authors, 1:382-421. 45. This charge is emphasized especially by Schafer, Judeophobia, 15-33. 46. Diodorus Siculus 40.3.4. 41.Ag.Ap. 2.148. 48. Bibliotheca Historica 34-35; Stem, Greek and Latin Authors, 1:181-85.

INTRODUCTION

11

was advised to capture Jerusalem and "wipe out the nation of the Jews, since they alone of all nations avoided dealings with any other people and looked upon all men as their enemies." He goes on to note that their ancestors had been driven out of Egypt "as men who were impious and detested by the gods." The charge of hostility to humanity figures prominently in the polemic of Lysimachus.*^ Apion alleged that the Jews annually conducted the ritual murder of a Greek.^" Tacitus noted that the practices introduced by Moses were opposed to those of all other human beings, and that the people was expelled from Egypt because it was hateful to the gods.^' It is anachronistic and misleading to categorize this tradition of antiJewish polemic as "anti-Semitic," thereby confusing it with the pseudo-scientific racist theory developed in Germany in the nineteenth century.^'^ Peter Schafer has recently objected that historical problems are not solved by merely changing names. For him, the crucial questions are "(a) whether there was always the same kind of hostility against and hatred of the Jews throughout history, and (b) whether there is something unique about this hostility directed at the Jew which distinguishes the Jews from other ethnic groups."^^ He finds this "something unique" in the charge of xenophobia and misanthropia: "The Jews as the 'evil incarnate,' denying and perverting in their xenophobic and misanthropic hatred all cherished values of humankind, conspiring against all the civilized world." He concludes, "Since it is the peculiar result of the amalgamation of Egyptian and Greek prejudices, one might argue that only the Idea of a world-wide Greco-Hellenistic civilization made it possible for the phenomenon we call anti-Semitism to emerge."^'* It is not our purpose here to explore the development of anti-Semitism. Any such exploration would have to engage both the role of Christianity in the development and the specific German culture that developed the ideology of the Nazis. A label such as "anti-Semitic," however, serves mainly to obscure the historical specificity of the polemics between Jew and Gentile in antiquity. Writers such as Hecataeus of Abdera and Manetho were far from suggesting that the Jews were the embodiment of evil, and it is far from evident that Apion, the arch-enemy of the Jews, was motivated by "the idea of a world-wide Greco-Hellenistic civilization." Two main factors contributed to the tradition of anti-Jewish polemic. One was the social tensions that existed between ethnic groups, especially in 49.Ag.Ap. 1.304-11. 50. Ag. Ap. 2.92-96. 51. Historiae 5.3.1-4.2; Schafer, Judeophobia, 31-33. 52. See the comments of S. J. D. Cohen. " 'Anli-Semitlsm' in Antiquity: The Problem of Definition," in D. Berger, ed.. History and Hate: The Dimensions of Anti-Semitism (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1986) 43-47. 53. Schafer, Judeophobia, 197. 54. Ibid., 206.

12

INTRODUCTION

Egypt, and the other was the distinctiveness of the Jewish r e l i g i o n . T h e Jews differed from Syrians and Idumeans insofar as they were more numerous and successful, but also Insofar as they were more cohesive and more resistant to assimilation. In the Ptolemaic period, when Jews enjoyed the favor of a king such as Phllometor, they inevitably incurred the resentment both of opposing factions and of other groups in the king's s e r v i c e . I n the Roman period, the Jews resented the fact that they were classified with the native Egyptians and denied the privileged status of the Greeks. Consequently, they often tried to emphasize their affinities with the Greeks and differences from the Egyptians, and were resented by both. Riots erupted in Alexandria in the reign of Caligula, and the problems between Greeks and Jews were laid before both Caligula and Claudius. The letter of Claudius, which confirmed the Jews' right to observe their own customs but reminded them that they lived in a city which was not their own, did not put an end to the racial tensions, as can be seen from the outbreak of fighting in 66 and the tragic revolt under T r a j a n . I n Rome, much of the most hostile polemic comes from the period after the Jewish revolt of 66-73 C.E., and much of it is animated by Roman paranoia about the dilution of Roman culture and values by eastern cults. The term "Judeophobia," which Schafer adopts from Zvi Yavetz,^^ has some justification in the case of imperial Rome. The social tensions between Jews and Gentiles in Egypt were exacerbated by the nature of the Jewish religion itself. Much of the hostile propaganda focused on the "strangeness" of the Jews, their refusal to worship the gods of the land and their alleged hostility to other peoples.^*' In fact, the Jewish tradition insisted that Yahweh was a jealous god who demanded that "you shall be holy to me, for I the LORD am holy, and have separated you from the peoples that you should be mine" (Lev. 20:26). The ideal of holiness 55. Schafer, Judeophobia, 1-6, distinguishes these factors as two kinds of explanation, the one "functionalist" and the other "substantialist," and provides a useful review of scholars who have favored each kind. In fact, these two factors must be viewed as complementary. 56. Josephus (Ag. Ap. 2,48) says that Apion derides the names of the Jewish generals Onias and Dositheus for taking the side of Philometor's widow against Ptolemy Euergetes II. The rivalry between Jews and Greeks in the Ptolemaic court may be reflected in the Greek translation of Esther, which makes Haman a Macedonian (see CPJ 1:24). 57. For a concise summary of this history, see CPJ 1:48-93. Also E. M. Smallwood, Philonis Alexandrini Legalio ad Gaium (2d ed,; Leiden: Brill, 1970) 3-36. For further bibliography see J. J. Collins, The Sibylline Oracles of Egyptian Judaism (SBLDS 13; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1974) 184-86, 58. Gager, The Origins of Anti-Semitism, 55-66. Cf the famous saying of Seneca that "the vanquished have given their laws to the victors" (Augustine, De Civitate Dei 6.11; Stern, Greek and iMtin Authors, 1:431). 59. Z, Yavetz, "Judeophobia in Classical Antiquity: A Different Approach," JJS 44 (1993) 1-22. 60. Sevenster, The Roots of Pagan Anti-Semitism, 89-144; Daniel, "Anti-Semitism," 5154.

INTRODUCTION

13

by separation from the Gentiles was especially prominent in postexilic Judaism.^^ The priestly laws in Leviticus were probably put in final form during the exile. The program for restoration in Ezekiel 40-48 provided clear boundary lines for preserving the purity of the temple and avoiding the errors of the past: "No foreigner, uncircumcised in heart and flesh, of all the foreigners who are among the people of Israel, shall enter my sanctuary" (Ezek. 44:9). A century later, Ezra was outraged to find that "the holy race has mixed itself with the peoples of the land" (Ezra 9:2) and instituted a reform which included the divorce of foreign wives. The distinctive commandments, such as Sabbath observance, circumcision, and dietary laws, were the hallmarks of Judaism which were most immediately obvious to Gentile observers in the following centuries.Hecataeus's observation that the Mosaic law was "somewhat unsocial and hostile to foreigners" was not unreasonable from a Greek point of view, and certainly not "anti-Semitic" In any accepted sense of that word. The fact that Jewish identity was so closely bound up with these observances obviously created obstacles for Jews who were attracted by Hellenistic culture — as is amply illustrated by the events which led up to the Maccabean revolt. We should not, of course, conclude that the Gentile reaction to Judaism was entirely n e g a t i v e . T h e earliest Greek writers on Judaism, such as Hecataeus, wrote with respect for the Jews. They were especially impressed by the laws of Moses and by the rejection of idols. Megasthenes and Clearchus regarded the Jews as philosophers. Strabo's Geography, book 16, gives a very sympathetic account of Moses and says that he set up an excellent government, even though Moses' successors took a serious turn for the worse. Some scholars attribute the passage to Posidonius. Varro, a contemporary of Caesar and Cicero, was impressed by the aniconic religion and identified the God of the Jews with Jupiter. Pompeius Trogus credited the Jews with "uniting justice with religion," and the treatise "On the Sublime," attributed to Longinus, had high praise for Moses. It appears, then, that there was a dimension of Judaism which was quite attractive to some people in the Hellenistic world. This was its philosophical dimension, its ethical code, and aniconic God.

61. See Bowker, The Religious Imagination, 31-45. The insistence on clear boundary markers and distinctive observances is typical of a beleaguered community, struggling to retain its identity in a hostile environment. Gruen, whose discussion includes some material of probable Palestinian origin, fails to note the prominence of halakic (legal) material in Palestinian Judaism. 62. For references see Daniel, "Anti-Semitism," 55-56. 63. For the following see Stern, "The Jews in Greek and Latin Literature," passim; J. G. Gager, Moses in Greco-Roman Paganism, 25-79; Feldman, Jew and Gentile, 201-9, 233-87.

14

INTRODUCTION

Jewish Apologetics The corpus of Jewish literature which has survived from the Diaspora may be viewed in part as a response to the assessments and polemics of the Gentiles.^* Since much of this literature is seen as defending a view of Judaism in Hellenistic categories, it is usually described as "apologetic." It is also commonly regarded as missionary literature — the propaganda which accompanied Jewish proselytizing.^^ Against this view, Victor Tcherikover argued in a celebrated essay that this literature is not properly apologetic but is directed to a Jewish rather than a Gentile audience.^^ Much of the secondary literature since Tcherikover's essay has been concerned with choosing between these alternatives. Some light can be thrown on this problem if we bear in mind the situation of the Diaspora Jews. The Hellenized Jew who aspired to participate in the cultural life of a city such as Alexandria experienced dissonance on two counts.^'' First, the Jewish tradition affirmed a certain account of Jewish origins and assessment of Jewish mores that was highly positive. In the Hellenistic world, the account of origins was often contradicted, and Jewish mores were denounced as antisocial superstition. The Hellenistic view of Judaism was, thus, often dissonant with the Jewish tradition. Second, the Jewish tradition itself was far from ecumenical and strongly discouraged any form of syncretism. Mingling with the nations was thought to be bad. Yet for many Diaspora Jews, mingling with their Hellenistic neighbors was highly desirable. Again, dissonance arose, or, in other terms, the plausibility of Judaism in the Hellenistic world came under strain. Where dissonance is present, there is inevitably pressure to reduce or 64. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, argues strongly against the view that this hterature is reactive, and emphasizes the creativity of the Jewish writers and their pride in their traditions. But these are by no means mutually exclusive positions, and it would be very unrealistic to think that the Jewish authors did not take account of Gentile opinion in some way. 65. M. Friedlander, Geschichte der jUdischen Apologetik (Zurich: Schmidt, 1903); P. Dalbert, Die Theologie der HeUenistisch-Jiidtschen Missionsliteratur unter Ausschluss von Philo und Josephus (Hamburg: Reich, 1954); D. Georgi, The Opponents of Paul in Second Corinthians (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986) 83-151; and, selectively, Feldman, Jew and Gentile, 293-98. The whole notion of a Jewish mission has been severely criticized in recent years. See M. Goodman, Mission and Conversion: Proselytizing in the Religious History of the Roman Empire (Oxford: Clarendon, 1994); S. McKnight, A Light among the Gentiles: Jewish Missionary Activity during the Second Temple Period (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991). The issue is dealt with in Chapter 7 below. 66. V. Tcherikover, "Jewish Apologetic Literature Reconsidered," Eos 48 (1956) 16993. 67. I take the term dissonance from L. Festinger, A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance (Evanston, 111. and White Plains, N.Y.: Row, Peterson & Co., 1957). A useful summary of the theory and of the subsequent critical literature can be found in R. P. Carroll, When Prophecy Failed: Cognitive Dissonance in the Prophetic Traditions of the Old Testament (New York: Seabury, 1979) 86-128.

INTRODUCTION

15

eliminate the dissonanee.^^ Perhaps the simplest way to do this was by abandoning Judaism altogether. Philo's nephew, Tiberius Julius Alexander, is the most notorious e x a m p l e . T h e r e were Jews who exercised this option, but they were always a minority. The majority sought ways to reduce the dissonance while remaining Jewish but without rejecting Hellenistic culture.''^ We will observe the various ways in which Jews accomplished this in the following chapters. Essentially, dissonance is reduced by modifying one or both of the conflicting bodies of opinion. Only rarely did Jews take issue with Hellenistic views of Judaism and refute them (as in Josephus's Against Apion) or simply contradict them. More often they highlighted the aspects of Judaism which were most acceptable to cultured Gentiles and to Jews who had absorbed Hellenistic culture, for example, by representing Judaism as a philosophy, while playing down the more peculiar customs and rituals. Conversely, they distinguished between the loftier elements of philosophical religion, with which rapprochement was possible, and the vulgar superstitions of the masses (especially the Egyptians). In this way the dissonance was admitted with some aspects of Hellenistic life, but was removed in a significant area. The allegorical interpretation of scripture by Philo and others is an evident method of reducing the dissonance between the Jewish scriptures and philosophical religion. The expression of traditional Jewish material in Hellenistic forms, such as tragedy and epic, again blurs the differences between the two traditions and serves to show that Judaism is not an alien body in the Hellenistic world.''^ When we realize that what was at stake was the plausibility of Jewish tradition in a new environment and the dissonance experienced by the Hellenized Jew, it is almost inevitable that the "apologetic" would be directed simultaneously to those within and to those outside. If Gentiles could be persuaded to embrace Judaism, clearly the Jews need not feel social pressure to abandon it.'''^ The outward movement of the propaganda si68. Festinger, A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, 18. For various ways in which this may be done, .see ibid., 182. 69. Another example is Dositheus, son of Drimylus. whose apostasy is recorded in 3 Mace. 1:3 and who is also known from the papyri (CPJ 1:230-36). At the end of the first revolt against Rome, an apostate named Antiochus, son of the archon of the Antiochene Jews, incited a pogrom against the Jews of Antioch (J.W. 7.47). On the phenomenon of apostasy, see further H. A. Wolfson, Philo (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1948) 1:73-78. 70. Cf. G. E. Sterling, "'Thus are Israel': Jewish Self-Definition in Alexandria," The Studia Philonica Annual 7 (1995) 1-18: "there are two foci which constitute the horizons of Alexandrian Jewish self-identity: the necessity of maintaining allegiance to the ancestral tradition, and the right to participation in Hellenism de bon coeur." 71. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 246, claims, with much justification, that "adjustment to the Hellenistic world expressed itself not as accommodation but as reaffirmation of their own lustrous legacy." But Gruen fails to notice the selectivity practiced by these writers, both with respect to their own tradition and with respect to Hellenistic culture. 72. "If more and more people can be persuaded that a system of belief is correct, then clearly it must after all be correct" (L. Festinger, H. W. Riecken, and S. Schachter, When

16

INTRODUCTION

multaneously has the effect of bolstering the faith of the community. On the other hand, the concentration on those aspects of Judaism which were most acceptable in the Hellenistic world could also facilitate propaganda and proselytism, since it presented Judaism in terms which a Greek could understand and appreciate. Even if the apologetic had little impact on outsiders, it still reduced the dissonance for the Jews since it showed how their tradition could be made compatible with the surrounding culture. In fact, there is very little evidence that Gentiles took note of any of this literature, and there can be little doubt that the primary readership was Jewish. But this in no way precludes the possibility that the Jewish authors also aspired to address their pagan neighbors, however unrealistic their aspiration may have been.

Hellenistic J u d a i s m a n d J u d e a In this volume we are concerned with the Diaspora, and especially with Egypt, since that is the area for which we have the most ample documentation.^' However, the problems posed by Hellenization were not confined to the Diaspora. As has often been pointed out in recent years, Judea was also profoundly influenced by Hellenism.^'* The so-called Hellenistic reform that preceded the Maccabean revolt was only the climax of a long and gradual process. For a century and a half Judea had been governed by the Ptolemies and Selelicids. The lively contacts between Judea and Egypt in the Ptolemaic period, and the ease with which prominent Jews engaged in Hellenistic commerce and politics, are illustrated by the Zeno papyri and the tales of the Prophecy Fails [New York: Harper, 1956] 28). See also J. G. Gager, Kingdom and Community (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1975) 39. Compare Festinger, A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, 200-202. 73. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 231-380, attempts to fill out the picture by providing chapters on Cyrenaica and Syria, Asia, and Rome, but the value of the exercise is severely limited by the lack of literary evidence that can be reliably attributed to these locations. 74. See esp. M. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism: Studies in Their Encounter in Palestine during the Early Hellenistic Period (2 vols.; Philadelphia: Fortress 1974); idem, Juden, Griechen und Barbaren: Aspekte der Hellenisierung des Judentums in vorchristUcher Zeit (SBS 76; Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1976), available in English as Jews, Greeks and Barbarians [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980]); Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization, 39-265; Schiirer, The History of the Jewish People, 2:29-80. On the Greek language in Palestine, see G. Mussies, "Greek in Palestine and the Diaspora," in S. Safrai and M. Stern, eds.. The Jewish People in the First Century (CRINT 1.2; Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976) 1040-64 and the literature there cited. See also D. Flusser, "Paganism in Palestine," ibid., 1065100. For Feldman, Jew and Gentile, 3-44, the question is not how thoroughly Jews in the land of Israel were Hellenized, but how strongly they resisted Hellenism.

INTRODUCTION

17

Tobiads in Josephus7^ We know of some thirty Greek cities within Palestine in the Hellenistic period.'''^ The Hasmoneans, while they treated these cities harshly, rapidly "went the way of Hellenization [and] began to resemble the normal type of Hellenistic monarch."''^ The names of the Hasmonean rulers are suggestive in this respect — Hyrcanus, Aristobulus, Alexander, Antigonus. From the time of Alexander Jannaeus, the Hasmonean coins bear a Greek inscription in addition to the Hebrew. Aristobulus called himself philhellen, "lover of the Greeks."''* Needless to say, the trend was continued by the Herods. It is not surprising, then, to find that we cannot draw a clear line between the literature of the Diaspora and that of Judea. At least one of the Hellenistic Jewish writers preserved in Eusebius was a Judean, Eupolemus, and he was (most probably) an associate of Judas Maccabee. In the case of some others, such as Philo the epic poet, Alexandrian provenance has generally been assumed without substantial evidence, but a Judean origin is also possible. In several other cases where the balance of probability favors a Diaspora setting, the evidence is extremely slight and arguments for Judean origins have also been put forward. (The Testament of Abraham is a case in point.) The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs are the ultimate monument to the failure of scholarship to pin down the literature of this period to definite historical settings.''^ On the one hand, there is an ongoing debate as to whether the Testaments are a Jewish composition with Christian redactional elements, or rather a Christian composition which incorporates Jewish traditions. Even those who regard them as Jewish disagree as to their provenance. Several recent studies have emphasized their contacts with Egyptian Judaism. Yet, fragments related to the Testament of Levi and the Testament of Naphtali have been found at Qumran, and there are many parallel motifs in the Testaments and the Scrolls. The complex history of the Testaments cannot be confined to either Judea or the Diaspora. Similar problems are raised by the fact that much Judean literature was translated into Greek and circulated in the Diaspora. Sometimes, as in the case of Esther and Daniel, the Greek version expanded the original, but even these expansions did not necessarily origi75. For the Zeno papyri see CPJ 1:115-46; for the Tobiads, Josephus, Ant. 12.4.1-11 §§154-234. 76. Schiirer, The History of the Jewish People. 2:85-183. See now A. Kasher, Jews and Hellenistic Cities in Eretz-Israel (Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1990). 77. Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization. 253. See also U. Rappaport. 'The Hellenization of the Hasmoneans," in M. Mor, ed., Jewish Assimilation, Acculturation and Accommodation: Past Traditions, Current Issues and Future Prospects (Studies in Jewish Civilization 2; Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1992) 1-13; T. Rajak, "The Hasmoneans and the Uses of Hellenism," in P. R. Davies and R. T. White, eds., A Tribute to Geza Vermes (Sheffield: JSOT, 1990) 261-80; Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism. 1-40. 78. Josephus, A«(. 13.11.3 §318. 79. See Chapter 4 below.

18

INTRODUCTION

nate in the Diaspora — the colophon of Greek Esther says that the Greek version was ascribed to "a member of the Jerusalem community."**^ 2 Maccabees claims to be the abridgment of a five-volume history of Jason of Cyrene. Yet it is prefaced by two letters from the Jews of Jerusalem to those in Egypt. The substance of the book is derived from Judea, although it is presented for a Diaspora audience. Such a book defies classification as either Palestinian or Diasporic. Similarly, the works of Josephus stand in the literary tradition of Hellenistic Judaism.*' Yet he himself was Judean. We should not, of course, conclude that there were no differences at all between Palestine and the Diaspora. Palestinian Judaism produced no philosopher analogous to Philo. The Diaspora has nothing to compare with the Rabbinic corpus, which was compiled from Palestinian tradition some centuries later. Hebrew and Aramaic were still widely used in the homeland.*^ Judaism was never a minority religion in Hellenistic Palestine, and the social and cultural support was obviously greater there than elsewhere. If Judea was politically and militarily threatened at various times, the cultural threat to the plausibility of the tradition was greater in the Diaspora. While even such reclusive areas as Qumran show Hellenistic influence,^^ attempts to express the Jewish tradition in explicitly Hellenistic forms are relatively few in Palestinian Judaism, whereas they predominate in the Diaspora. In short, while the familiar opposition of Hellenistic and Palestinian Judaism cannot be maintained and while there is a considerable gray area where we cannot be sure of the derivation of particular works, the fact remains that the main evidence for the attempt to present Judaism in Hellenistic dress derives from the Diaspora.

80. C. A. Moore, Daniel, Esther and Jeremiah: The Additions (AB 44; Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1977) 250-51. The reliability of the ascription is questionable. 81. H. W. Attridge, The Interpretation of Biblical History in the Antiquitates ludaicae of Flavins Josephus (HDR 7; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1976) and the articles by L. H. Feldman noted in Attridge's bibliography. H. R. Moehring, "The Acta pro Judaeis in the Antiquities of Flavius Josephus: A Study in Hellenistic and Modem Apologetic Historiography," in J. Neusner, ed., Christianity, Judaism and Other Greco-Roman Cults: Studies for Morton Smith at Sixty (Leiden: Brill, 1975) 3:124-58; Feldman and Levison, eds., Josephus' Contra Apionem. Josephus, unlike the Diaspora apologists, addressed his work explicitly to Gentiles. 82. C. Rabin, "Hebrew and Aramaic in the First Century," in S. Safrai and M. Stem, eds.. The Jewish People in the First Century (CRINT 1.2; Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976) 1007-39; Schiirer, The History of the Jewish People, 2:20-28. 83. M. Hengel, "Qumran und der Hellenismus," in M. Delcor, ed., Qumran: Sa piite sa theologie et son milieu (BETL 46; Paris and Gembloux: Duculot and Louvain University, 1978) 333-72.

INTRODUCTION

19

T h e Constraints of the Tradition The peculiarity of Judaism from the time of the Babylonian exile is that it is both a nationality and a way of life. Moses, says Josephus, held "that it is not family ties (genos) alone which constitute relationship, but agreement in the principles of conduct (proairesis tou biou)."^^ Most Jews were Jews by birth and reinforced their identity by attendance at synagogue and observance of Sabbath, kashrut, and other distinctive Jewish observances.*^ But it was also possible for a Gentile to adopt the way of life as a convert, and for a Jew by birth to abandon the way of life. Exactly which beliefs and practices were essential to the way of life were not clearly defined, however, and so people might define their Jewish identity in various ways.*^ There was, however, an authoritative body of scriptures which provided a frame of reference, especially for the formulation of Jewish identity in literary texts. At least from the early Hellenistic period, Judaism had a corpus of scripture, of which the book of the Torah, the Pentateuch, was the authoritative foundation.*'' It is significant that the earliest literary activity of the Greek-speaking Diaspora was the translation of the book of the Torah, and its influence is pervasive throughout the Hellenistic Jewish corpus.** The translation inevitably involved some transformation of the material. We need only mention the celebrated rendering of the divine self-introduction in Exod. 3:14, eimi ho on ("I am the one who is"). However, while Hellenistic sensibilities in theology and style inevitably left some imprints, the Septuagint version of the Pentateuch is remarkably faithful to its prototypes, and is far 84. Ag. Ap. 2.210. See S. J. D. Cohen, "Religion, Ethnicity, and 'Hellenism' in the Emergence of Jewish Identity in Maccabean Palestine," in P. Bilde, T. Engberg-Pedersen, L. Hannestad, and J. Zahle, eds.. Religion and Religious Practice in the Seleucid Kingdom (Aarhus: Aarhus University Press, 1990) 204-23; also S. J. D. Cohen, " 'Those Who Say They Are Jews and Are Not': How Do You Know a Jew in Antiquity When You See One?" in S. J. D. Cohen and E. S. Frerichs, eds., Diasporas in Antiquity (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993) 1-46. 85. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 402-18. 86. Cohen, "Rehgion, Ethnicity and Hellenism," 206-7. 87. J. J, Collins, "Before the Canon: Scriptures in Second Temple Judaism," in idem. Seers. Sibyls and Sages in Hellenistic-Roman Judaism (Leiden: Brill, 1997) 3-21. 88. See S. Jellicoe, The Septuagint and Modern Study (Oxford: Clarendon, 1968) 55: "Association direct or indirect with Philadelphus places the undertaking well before the middle of the third century B.c, Apart from the Aristeas tradition this is borne out by the available external evidence." So also Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1:690. Jellicoe discusses the various modern theories of origin on pp. 59-73. A good sample of modern views on the Septuagint can be found in S. Jellicoe, ed.. Studies in the Septuagint: Origins Recensions and Interpretations (New York: Ktav, 1974). The main opponent of the view that the Septuagint was translated in the time of Philadelphus was Paul Kahle, who argued that the Greek Bible developed in the form of unofficial, targum-like translations and that the Letter of Aristeas was promoting a revised translation about 100 B.C.E. Kahle's view can be found in The Cairo Geniza (Oxford: Blackwell, 1959). It has been widely rejected in the light of the Qumran discoveries. See Jellicoe, The Septuagint, 59-63.

20

INTRODUCTION

removed from the free rendering of the tradition we find in some Hellenistie Jewish authors, or from the paraphrastic nature of the Targums.*^ There is no doubt that it aspired to render accurately the basic documents of the tradition, and to a great extent it succeeded.^'^ In short. Diaspora Judaism had the same scriptural foundation as its Palestinian counterpart. The Torah provided a common basis for postexilic Judaism, in the sense that all forms of Judaism related to it in one way or another. It did not provide a definitive norm in the sense of prescribing a single orthodox way of being Jewish. To begin with, the corpus of scripture continued to grow well into the Hellenistic period. The latest addition to the Hebrew canon, Daniel, was composed only at the time of the Maccabean revolt. The Greek translation of some of the writings was later still. Further, the religious life of the people was always informed by the ongoing tradition and by influential writings which were never accorded the status of scripture. The tradition drew heavily on the scriptures, but nevertheless rewrote them freely and continued to provide new formulations and emphases.^' The ongoing process of reformulation points to a more basic problem with any canon — the possibility of diverse interpretations. The most celebrated conflict of interpretations in postexilic Judaism was located in the Egyptian Diaspora, where Philo defended his allegorical interpretation against the "unreflective" literalists on the one hand, but also against the extreme allegorists "who, regarding laws in their literal sense in the light of symbols belonging to the intellect, are overpunctilious about the latter, while treating the former with easy-going neglect."^^ It should be observed that the extreme allegorists are not denounced 89. Hengel, Juden, Griechen und Barbaren, 131-32; E. J. Bickerman, "The Septuagint as a Translation," in Studies in Jewish and Christian History. 1:167-200; E. Tov, "Die griechischen Bibelubersetzungen," ANRW 2.1QA, 121-89 (especially 135-51). Since the discovery of the Qumran scrolls, it has become apparent that in many cases where the Septuagint differs from the Masoretic text, it had a different Hebrew prototype. See F. M. Cross and S. Talmon, eds., Qumran and the History of the BibUcal Text (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1975). It should be noted that the divergence from the Hebrew is more significant in later books such as Job and Proverbs than it is in the Pentateuch. See Jellicoe, The Septuagint, 316-18. 90. See H. M. Orlinsky, "The Septuagint as Holy Writ and the Philosophy of the Translators," HUCA 46 (1975) 89-114. "It is the literal word-for-word rendering that prevailed in the Septuagint rendering of the Torah" (ibid., p. 103). There is widespread agreement that "the translation was made for Jews, undoubtedly for use in synagogue worship and instruction. To this its style bears whness, and is against its being a translation executed for purely literary effect" (Jellicoe, The Septuagint, 55). 91. See especially J. L. Kugel, The Bible as It Was (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1997). Also Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism. 110-36. 92. Philo, De Migratione Abrahami 89-93. See the discussion by Wolfson, Philo, 1:66' 71, Wolfson contends that while Philo "blamed" the allegorists, he did not blame the literalists, citing De Confusione Linguarum 38, 190, where Philo says that he would "not blame such persons, for perhaps the truth is with them also." However, it does not follow that Philo would never "blame" the literalists, but only that he did not in this particular case.

INTRODUCTION

21

as apostates, even though Philo "blames" them. They are still said to be "over-punctilious" in their own approach. The diversity of interpretation was not always due to Hellenistic philosophy, but was prompted by several factors. In fact, the Torah itself was never a consistent systematic treatise, but a compilation of materials which embraced diverse attitudes and even contradictions, and so by its very nature invited diversity of interpretation.^^ It is of course possible that a particular interpretation of the Torah, or an understanding of Judaism distilled from the Torah, could attain normative status. E. P. Sanders has proposed the expression "pattern of religion" for "the description of how a religion is perceived by its adherents to function,'' that is, ''how getting in and staying in are understood: the way in which a religion is understood to admit and retain members is considered to be the way it 'functions.'"^'* Sanders has further argued that the pattern of "covenantal nomism" was pervasive in Palestinian Judaism and was the "basic type of religion" there In the period 200 B.C.E. to 200 C.E.,^^ but was also widespread in the Diaspora and was to a great degree ""the religion of Judaism."^'^ Covenantal nomism is defined as "the view according to which salvation comes by membership in the covenant, while obedience to the commandments preserves one's place in the covenant."^'' There is no doubt that the conception of a covenant with its attendant obligations was of major importance in Judaism and occupied a central place in the canonical Torah. Yet here again the question of understanding and interpretation is crucial. If we grant Sanders's claim that 4 Ezra diverged from the pattern of covenantal nomism and is instead legalistic,^* the fact remains that 4 Ezra clearly presupposes the Mosaic covenant as the basis of Judaism. The divergence lies in the understanding of the covenant, and 4 Ezra is none the less Jewish because of it. Again, Sanders's brief treatment of Diaspora Judaism shows that the pattern of covenantal nomism could coexist with other patterns in a subordinate role: while Philo 93. On the process see J. A. Sanders, "Adaptable for Life: The Nature and Function of Canon," in F. M. Cross, W. E. Lemke, and R D. Miller, eds., Magnalia Dei: The Mighty Acts of God: Essays on the Bible and Archaeology in Memory of G. E. Wright {New York: Doubleday, 1976) 531-60. 94. E. R Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism {Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977) 17. 95. Ibid., 426. 96. E. P. Sanders, 'The Covenant as a Soteriological Category and the Nature of Salvation in Palestinian and Hellenistic Judaism," in R. Hamerton-Kelly and R. Scroggs, eds., Jews. Greeks and Christians: Essays in Honor of William David Davies (SJLA 21, Leiden: Brill, 1976) 41; idem, Paul and Palestinian Judaism, 75, 235-36. Sanders does not claim that this was the only pattern of religion in Judaism. In Palestinian Judaism he finds 4 Ezra exceptional in that salvation is strictly according to an individual's works, whereas in Hellenistic Judaism he recognizes another view of "realized salvation through a mystic rite or vision." 97. Ibid. 98.1 am not convinced that this view is justified, but the understanding of the covenant in 4 Ezra is in any case somewhat different from, say, that in 2 Baruch.

22

INTRODUCTION

"did not renounce covenantal nomism,"^^ he regarded "true Judaism" as a quest for the vision of the incorporeal.'*"' It is not enough, then, to ask whether the elements of covenantal nomism are present. We must ask what is the dominant pattern that determines the understanding of Judaism on the most significant level. When due emphasis is placed on the element of understanding in "the way a religion is understood to function," it becomes apparent that Judaism in the Hellenistic age was not nearly as uniform as Sanders suggests. The traditional "covenant form," which has been outlined by Mendenhall and Baltzer,^^' entailed one particular understanding of Judaism. The obligations of the law arose from the history of the people, especially from the mighty acts by which God had given them the land. That history imposed a debt of gratitude and loyalty. Further motivation was supplied by the blessings and curses which promised well-being to the faithful and punishment for the rebellious. This understanding of the covenant persisted throughout the Hellenistic and Roman periods. It is clearly shown in a series of prayers of repentance which review the history of the people, confess their breach of obligation, acknowledge their present distress as an appropriate punishment, and then appeal to the mercy of God. These prayers are found in canonical texts (Nehemiah 9; Dan. 9:4b-13); at Qumran (IQS l:24b-2:l; CD 20:28-30; 4Q Words of the Luminaries 1:8-7:2); and in the Diaspora, both east and west (Tob. 3:1-6; 3 Mace. 2:2-20; LXX prayer of Esther).i'>2 Yet, side by side with these traditional formulations we find other interpretations of Judaism. It is of the essence of the apocalyptic literature that the history of Israel is no longer a sufficient grounding for the covenant obligations. There is need of a higher, supernatural revelation. It is the vision of the apocalyptic seer, over and above the recollection of history, that provides the insight to support the faithful.'"-* By contrast, in the wisdom literature of the Hebrew Bible (Proverbs, Qoheleth) there is no such appeal to higher revelation. Yet here, too, the traditional logic of the covenant is thrust into the background. Wisdom is derived from the observation of human nature, which is potentially universal. Israel and its law may be the supreme embodiment of wisdom, but their status is appreciated in the universal categories of wisdom 99. Sanders, "The Covenant as a Soteriological Category," 42. 100. Ibid., 34. 101. Mendenhall, Law and Covenant in Israel and tlie Ancient Near East (Pittsburgh: Presbyterian Board of Colportage, 1954); K. Baltzer, Tiie Covenant Formulary (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1971); D. Hitlers, Covenant: Tiie History of a Biblical Idea (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1969). 102. O, H. Steck, Israel und das gewaltsame Gescliick der Propiieten (WMANT 23; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1967). 103. J. J. Collins, "Cosmos and Salvation: Jewish Wisdom and Apocalyptic in the Hellenistic Age," HR {\911) 121-42 (= Seers, Sibyls and Sages, 317-38).

INTRODUCTION

23

rather than asserted on the basis of Israel's history.'"* Wisdom and apocalypticism, then, to mention only two major examples, reflect different understandings of Judaism, each distinct from the traditional covenantal pattern. This is not to suggest that we can isolate rigidly separate and mutually incompatible patterns in postexilic Judaism. Quite the contrary. As Sanders has shown in the case of Philo, distinct ways of understanding the religion can persist side by side with little attempt to clarify their implications for each other. Religion is notoriously resistant to attempts to reduce it to consistency. A religion such as Judaism in the Hellenistic age is nourished by a long tradition which inevitably contains an accumulation of diverse and often contradictory elements. The diversity which exists within the book of the Torah itself is well known. People remain within the religion as long as they continue to define their identity in terms of the tradition and find within it adequate resources for life.'*'^ Despite the undeniably central role of the covenant law in the Jewish tradition, not all strands of Judaism had their primary focus on the law, and even those that did understood it in various ways. None of the variants of Judaism actually rejects the law, although some pay little explicit attention to it. Since the purpose of a religion is to assemble resources for living rather than articulate consistent systems, we cannot be surprised to find that different ways of understanding the religion are commonly found in combination, although it is usually possible to speak of a dominant pattern. In the light of the preceding discussion, the importance of the Torah can be seen In perspective. The Torah was the basic component in the tradition, and those who would remain within Judaism had to relate themselves to it in some way. This did not mean that all had to conform to a single pattern. Not all the laws were necessarily binding, and the element of law was not necessarily the focal point of the tradition which was most significant for establishing Jewish identity. Rather, a number of dilTerent approaches could be taken within the bounds of the tradition. Further, we must beware of defining Jewish identity too narrowly in theological terms. As we noted at the outset, national identity was always built up by a number of factors. Ethnic continuity was evidently a matter of major importance, despite the acceptance of proselytes, and was a serious factor in the prohibition of intermarriage. Political allegiance and relations with the land of Israel were also significant factors in Jewish identity. Finally, we must recognize that the Jewish identity of a cultivated man like Philo was not quite the same as that of the Roman Jew "taught by his 104. J. J. Collins, "The Biblical Precedent for Natural Theology," JAAR 45/1 (1977) Supp B:35-67. 105. Cf. the remarks of J. Bowker, The Religious Imaginaiion, 17-18.

24

INTRODUCTION

mother to beg."'"^ Social stratification undoubtedly modified Jewish understanding of the tradition and relations with the Gentiles.'"^ Unfortunately, the views of the lower classes are not well recorded in the literature. The distinct groupings which we can identify in Ptolemaic Egypt are political rather than social — as shown, for example, in the attitudes towards the various Egyptian rulers in the Sibylline Oracles — or are even simply theological. Only after the first revolt against Rome (66-70 C.E.) do we find significant social division within the Jewish community — in the rejection of the Slcarii by the Alexandrian Jews and the destruction of the Jewish upper classes in Cyrene.

Relations with the Gentile E n v i r o n m e n t Just as Hellenistic Jews might relate to their tradition in various ways, so they might also have different responses to their Gentile environment. John Barclay has recently provided a helpful discussion of different levels of assimilation and acculturation in the Jewish D i a s p o r a . I n his discussion of the literature, however, he opts for a simpler division between cultural convergence and cultural antagonism. While he recognizes that a given writing may exhibit both tendencies, the binary division tends to distort the appreciation of the literature, especially when closely related works such as the writings of Philo and the Wisdom of Solomon are placed in the opposing categories. Erich Gruen, in contrast, highlights the literary diversity of Hellenistic Jewish writing but sees little variation in theme. He takes the literature as a manifold expression of Jewish pride and superiority that is seldom antagonistic or adversarial.'"^ While each of these approaches sheds significant new light on the subject, neither does justice to the nuanced interaction of the Jewish writers with their own tradition and their Hellenistic environment. None of the writings that has come down to us shows either unqualified rejection of Hellenistic culture or unqualified acceptance. All of them, in various ways, reflect attempts to discriminate between aspects of the culture that they embrace, beginning with the Greek language and literary forms, and those elements that were unacceptable, primarily in matters of religion and cult.''" Apion's famous question accurately identified the dilemma of Helle106. Martial 12.57.13. 107. On the social stratification of Jews in the Diaspora, see esp. Applebaum, "The Social and Economic Status of the Jews in the Diaspora." 108. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 82-124. 109. Gruen, The Heritage of Hellenism, 293. 110. For a nicely nuanced account, see C. R. Holladay, "Jewish Responses to Hellenistic Culture in Early Ptolemaic Egypt." in Bilde et al., eds,. Ethnicity in Hellenistic Egypt, 139-63; also Sterling, "Thus are Israel."

INTRODUCTION

25

nistic Jews: "Why, if they are eitizens, do they not worship the same gods as the Alexandrians?""' Even apart from the issue of citizenship, the same question might be asked about Greek culture, which was difficult to separate from pagan Greek religion. Much of the literature of Hellenistic Judaism is inspired by the attempt to achieve this separation, by endorsing some elements of Hellenistic culture while repudiating others. It is true that all these writings testify to Jewish pride and sense of superiority. But the aspects of Jewish tradition of which they boast are highly selective. Nowhere in the corpus of Jewish literature written in Greek do we find anything like 4QMMT, the treatise on "some of the works of the Law" that the contemporary Dead Sea sect regarded as crucial for the practice of true Judaism."^ Instead, we find the tradition nuanced in various ways that bring it into continuity with the Hellenistic world, even if Judaism still retains some distinctive emphases. There is always some measure of accommodation and acculturation. The appreciation of the literature lies in the degree and nuance.

Prospect With these various factors in mind, our study of the Hellenistic Diaspora is divided into two main parts: Part One: National and Political Identity. Part Two: Identity through Ethics and Piety. Part One considers Jewish identity primarily in historical and political terms and is divided into three chapters: 1. The Uses of the Past: The retelling of history as a way of redefining identity, both by refuting hostile accounts and by modifying the tradition in the light of the Hellenistic environment. Several of the earliest documents of Hellenistic Judaism fall into this category. 2. Religion and Politics: The Ptolemaic Age: A number of documents from the second and first centuries B.C.E. contain a significant element of political propaganda (Sibylline Oracles 3 is perhaps the prime example). These documents throw light on the conception of Jewish identity in political terms and the consequent attitudes towards Gentile authorities and towards the land of Israel. m.Ag.

Ap. 2.65. 112. E. Qiniron and J. Strugnell, Qumran Cave 4. V. Miqsat Ma'ase ha-Torah (DJD 10; Oxford: Clarendon, 1994).

26

INTRODUCTION

3. Religion and Polities: The Roman Age: Political aspects of Jewish identity are again reflected in the struggles in Alexandria in the first century C.E. and in the events leading up to the Diaspora revolt. Part Two has four chapters: 4. The Common Ethic: One of the best-known characteristics of Hellenistic Judaism lies in the attempt to build bridges to Hellenistic culture by affirming Jewish values which were also appreciated by enlightened Gentiles (e.g., rejection of idolatry and homosexuality) while playing down the more problematic rituals and observances. While we do not find strict consistency in the various Jewish documents, there is a nearly universal trend in this direction, and we will find few exceptions. 5. Philosophical Judaism: The main representative of philosophical Judaism was Philo of Alexandria. We will not attempt an analysis of Philo's copious works here, but will be concerned with the preliminary stages of the attempt to translate Jewish tradition into philosophical terms, in, for example, Aristobulus and the Letter of Aristeas; and the philosophical dimension of rhetorical works, namely, the Wisdom of Solomon and 4 Maccabees. 6. The Mysteries of God: The understanding of Judaism in terms of divine mystery which requires a revelation or mystical experience over and above the Mosaic Torah. The higher vision, again, can be conceived in various ways, ranging from the philosophical orientation of the Orphic fragments to the mythic mode of apocalypses such as 2 Enoch and 3 Baruch. 7. Jews and Gentiles: Although there is scant evidence in the Hellenistic age for an organized Jewish mission to convert Gentiles, there is evidence of looser forms of Gentile attachment to Judaism short of conversion. The division of the material proposed above is a practical means of organizing the various aspects of Jewish identity in the Diaspora. There is no implication that the different aspects are mutually exclusive. A text which retells Israelite history may also reflect political allegiance and may further attempt to propagate an ethical message. Accordingly, some of the major documents will be discussed, from different aspects, in more than one chapter. Our objective is not to impose any simple divisions on Diaspora Judaism, but rather to appreciate the variety and complexity of the factors which molded Jewish identity even in a single situation or in a single document.

PART ONE

NATIONAL AND POLITICAL IDENTITY

CHAPTER ONE

The Uses of the Past

The expression of Jewish identity in national and political terms is found in a wide range of writings and literary genres. The form which lent itself most readily to this purpose was undoubtedly history writing, not in the modern critical sense but broadly construed to embrace the myths and legends of the people. History, as the story of the people's past and origin, had always been highly valued in Judaism. Much of the biblical material has a "history-like" character in the sense that it tells the story of the people within a chronological framework.' In the Hellenistic age the Jews had new reason to retell the story of their past. The spread of Hellenism under Alexander and his successors was accompanied, at least initially, by considerable Greek curiosity about the strange peoples of the East. A number of writers, such as Megasthenes and Hecataeus of Abdera, attempted to satisfy it.^ While these writers were "important and responsible persons,"^ they had only a superficial knowledge of the cultures they described and were hampered by their ignorance of the relevant languages. They did, however, have a tradition of ethnography dating back to the histories of Herodotus and the geographical writings of Hecataeus of Miletus, and they tended to cast the eastern peoples in molds prepared by the Greek imagination. 1. J. Barr, "Story and History in Biblical Theology," JR 56 (1976) 6; J. J. Collins. "The 'Historical' Character of the Old Testament in Recent Biblical Theology," CBQ4\ (1979) 185204, 2. A. Momigliano, Alien Wisdom: The Limits of Hellenization (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975) 7-8, 82-87; B. Z. Wacholder, Eupolennis: A Study of Judaeo-Gieek Literature (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College, 1974) 261-62; G. E. Sterling, Historiography and Self-Defmition: Josephos, Luke Acts and Apologetic Historiograpliy (Leiden: Brill, 1992) 55102. On Greek accounts of the East, see further R, Drews, The Greek Accounts of Eastern History (Center for Hellenic Studies; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1973). 3. Momigliano, Alien Wisdom, 86.

29

30


So, for example, the early Hellenistie writers tended to depict the Jews as "priestly sages of the type the East was expected to produce."* Romance and legend were blended with factual reporting. Hecataeus of Abdera preserves a detailed description of the Ramasseum, the mortuary chapel of Rameses II, but also a lengthy and highly legendary account of the conquests and deeds of Sesostris.^ Other factors besides simple curiosity undoubtedly influenced these writers. Hecataeus's tendency to assert the superiority and greater antiquity of Egyptian culture may well have been motivated by a desire to establish the superiority of the Ptolemaic kingdom.^ The writings of the Greeks about the East prompted some of the native peoples to explain their own culture to the Greek world.^ Their attempts were inevitably influenced by Greek prototypes, but they were diverse in kind. Some "wanted to replace the romantic tales of Herodotus, Ctesias, Megasthenes, and other Greek authorities on the orient by a dry but authentic recapitulation of native records."^ Such, essentially, were Berossus of Babylon and Manetho of Egypt.^ Yet their free inclusion of myths and legends could not satisfy the more scientific of the Greeks, who had grown skeptical of the historical value of myths. Bickerman has observed the implausibility of the primeval history of Berossus, or of the Bible, for those who questioned the historicity of Homer's epics.'" On the other hand, some gave free rein to the romantic and legendary elements, and tales about Semiramis and Nebuchadnezzar, Sesostris and Nektanebo circulated widely." The writers of the vari-

4. Ibid. 5. See P M. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria (Oxford: Clarendon, 1972) 1:500. 6. Ibid., 1:504. 7. D. Mendels, " 'Creative History' in the Hellenistic Near East in the Third and Second Centuries BCE: The Jewish Case," JSP 2 (1988) 13-20. 8. E. J. Bickerman, "The Jewish Historian Demetrios," in J, Neusner, ed., Christianity, Judaism and Other Greco-Roman Cults: Studies for Morton Smith at Sixty (Leiden: Brill, 1975) 3:72-84 (here, p. 77); reprinted in idem. Studies in Jewish and Christian History (3 vols.; AGJU 9; Leiden: Brill, 1976-86) 2:347-58. 9. G. P. Verbrugghe and J. M. Wickersham, Berossos and Manetho, Introduced and Translated: Native Traditions in Ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1996); Sterling, Historiography and Self-Definition, 103-36. On Berossus see also S. M. Burstein, The Babyloniaca of Berossus (SANE 1/5; Malibu: Undena, 1978); on Manetho, see Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1:505-11. 10. Bickerman ("The Jewish Historian Demetrios," 79-80): "since Ephorus (ca. 340), Greek scholarship had given up the pretension to be able to discover the historical facts underlying the myths. The realm of the legend began beyond ca. 1200 B.C. In the days when Eratosthenes refused to discover history in the Homeric tale of Odysseus' wanderings, Berossus asserted that in his land the kings reigned for more than 30,000 years before Alexander the Great." 11. For this literature see M. Braun, History and Romance in Graeco-Oriental Literature (Oxford: Blackwell, 1938) and S. K. Eddy, The King Is Dead: Studies in the Near Eastern Resistance to Hellenism (Lincoln: University of Nebraska, 1961). Also Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria 1:675-87, and the literature there cited, esp. for the Alexander Romance, which derives

THE USES OF THE PAST

31

ous nations were also aware of each other, and their writings often had a competitive aspect, as each laid claim to the greatest antiquity and most impressive culture heroes.'^ They also engaged in polemics. The fragments of Manetho include a derogatory account of Jewish origins'^ which is recorded in Josephus's tract Against Apion at the end of the first century C.E. as initiating a long line of anti-Jewish polemics. The earliest literature of the Hellenistic Diaspora developed in the context of this initial mutual discovery by the Greeks and their subjects. The Septuagint itself could be viewed in part as a contribution to this process, but it was singularly unsuited to catch the attention of the Greeks.'* In fact, the Greeks paid little attention to any of the writings of the native orientals,'^ but many Jewish writers did express themselves in forms which might have been accessible to the Greeks. Even if they failed to make any significant impact on the Gentile audience, they surely helped satisfy the self-understanding of the increasingly Hellenized Jewish community. The earliest writings of the Hellenistic Diaspora have survived only in fragments. Their survival was due to the industry of Alexander Polyhistor of Miletus, who was brought to Rome as a prisoner of war and given his freedom by Sulla about 80 B.C.E. and who wrote in the following decades.'^ While he may have "lacked taste and originality,"''' his compilations of excerpts from other authors preserved samples of much literature that would otherwise have been lost. It is noteworthy that the work of Berossus, too, was known to posterity only through Alexander.'^ Alexander's own work has not survived, but substantial fragments have been preserved by other authors.'^ from the third century C.E. in its present form but contains material dating back to the early Hellenistic age. 12. See esp. Braun, Histoiy and Romance. Syncellus states that Manetho wrote "in imitation of Berossus" (Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1:505; 2:728n.95). 13. Whether this account should be ascribed to Manetho is vigorously disputed. See Verbrugghe and Wickersham, Berossos and Manetlio, 116. 14. See Momighano, A/iCH Wisdom, 91-92. Despite the account of the Letter of Aristeas, there is little doubt that the LXX was primarily designed for the internal needs of the Jewish community. 15. See Bickerman, "The Jewish Historian Demetrios," 79. 16. J. Freudenthal, Hellenistisclie Studien, 1-2, Alexander Polyhistor und die von ihm erhaltenen Resle juddischer und samaritanischer Geschichtswerlce (Breslau: Skutsch, 1875); E. Schwartz, "Alexandros von Milet," PWRE 1/2 (1894) 1449; F. Jacoby, FGH, Hla, 96-126; F. W Walbank, "Alexander (II) 'Polyhistor,'" OCD, 35; A. M. Denis, Introduction aux Pseudepigraphes Grecs d'Ancien Testament (SVTP 1; Leiden: Brill, 1970) 244-46; Wacholder, Eupolemus, 44-52; J. Strugnell, "General Introduction, with a Note on Alexander Polyhistor," in J. H. Charlesworth, ed.. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (2 vols.; New York: Doubleday, 1983, 1985) 2-J11-19; Sterling, Historiography and Self-Defmition, 144-52. 17. Walbank, "Alexander," 35. 18. Bickerman, "The Jewish Historian Demetrios," 79. 19. Apart from the transmission of the Jewish authors, Alexander was an important source for Diogenes Laertius and Stephanus of Byzantium. See Wacholder, Eupolemus, 45.

32


His work on the Jews was cited at length by Eusebius in the ninth book of his Praeparatio Evangelica, and this is our chief source for the fragments of the early Hellenistic Jewish authors.^" Fragments are also preserved by Clement of Alexandria and by Josephus.^' Both Eusebius and Alexander repeated their sources accurately, insofar as we can judge.^^ While the preserved fragments are less than we should wish, they attest a rich variety in Jewish Hellenistic literature. We may distinguish three main approaches to the past in the Jewish Hellenistic literature; 1. The faithful chroniclers, whose main representative is Demetrius. 2. The historical romances, represented by, for example, Artapanus. 3. The epic poets, Philo and Theodotus.

20. K. Mras, Eusebius' Werke, 8, Die Praeparatio Evangelica {GCS 43; 2 vols.; Berlin; Akademie, 1954). Previous editions of the Jewish fragments are now superseded by C. R. Holladay, Fragments from Hellenistic Jewish Authors (4 vols.; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 198396), Annotated English translations can also be found in Charlesworth, ed.. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, 2:775-919. 21. Wacholder, Eupolemus, 52-70. It is possible that Clement also had independent knowledge of the Hellenistic Jewish authors. 22. Ibid., 48-49; Denis, Introduction. 242-43. 23. The classic study is still Freudenthal's Hellenistische Studien. Significant modem treatments include P. Dalbert, Die Theologie der hellenistischjudischen Missionsliteratur unter Ausschluss von Philo und Josephus {Hamburg: Reich, 1954); Y. Gutman, The Beginnings of Jewish-Hellenistic Literature (Jerusalem: Bialik, 1958, in Hebrew); N. Walter, Fragmente jUdisch-hellenistischer Historiker (JSHRZ 1.2; Gtitersloh: Mohn, 1976); idem, Fragmente jiidisch-hellenistischer Exegeten (JSHRZ 3.2; 1975); idem, "Jiidisch-hellenistische Literatur vor Philon von Alexandrien (unter Ausschluss der Historiker)," ANRW\\.2d.\, 68-120; idem, "Jewish-Greek Literature of the Greek Period," in W. D. Davies and L. Finkelstein, eds.. The Cambridge History of Judaism. Volume 2: The Hellenistic Age (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989) 385-408; M. Hengel, "Anonymitat, Pseudepigraphie und-'Literarische FHlschung' in der judisch-hellenistischen Literatur," Entretiens sur I 'Antiquite Classique XVIII (Pseudepigrapha I) (1972) 231-309; Denis, Introduction, 239-83; Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1:687-716; H. W. Attridge, "Historiography," in M. E. Stone, ed., Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period (CRINT 2.2; Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984) 157-84; R. Doran, "Jewish Hellenistic Historians before Josephus," in ANRW II.20.1, 246-97; M. Goodman, in E. Schurer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 B.C.-A.D. 135) (rev. and ed. G. Vermes, F. Millar, and M. Goodman; 3 vols.; Edinburgh: Clark, 1973-87) 3.1:509-66; Sterhng, Historiography atid Self-Definition, 137-225; E. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism: The Reinvention of Jewish Tradition (Berkeley: University of California Press. 1998) 110-60.


33

T h e Faithful Chroniclers

Demetrius The eariiest known Hellenistie Jewish author, Demetrius, often called the Chronographer,^^ has been aptly classified by Bickerman with those oriental historians like Berossus and Manetho who sought to produce "a dry but authentic recapitulation of native records."^^ His date is indicated by the passage in Clement {Stromateis, 1.141.8), where he reckons the time from the fall of Samaria to the fourth Ptolemy. The numbers given are problematic, but we may agree with Fraser that the reference to Ptolemy IV is less likely to be corrupt than the numbers, and so accept the usual dating to the time of Philopator (222-205 B.C.E.), approximately half a century after Manetho.^^ The rather scanty fragments have been variously characterized. Freudenthal regards Demetrius as a forerunner of midrashic literature; Walter classifies him as an exegete; while Fraser insists that he is more historian than exegete. There is some basis for each of these opinions. Demetrius is concerned to resolve problems in the biblical text, but the problems on which he focuses are primarily matters of chronology and genealogy.^'' By resolving the apparent historical problems, he sought to establish the reliability of the tradition. His picture of Judaism, such as it is, is then allowed to emerge from the retelling of history. The approach to Jewish identity is through the record of the people's past. The concerns of Demetrius may be illustrated by the passage {Praep. Evang. 9.29.1-3) on the marriage of Moses and Zipporah, the daughter of Jethro.^^ Demetrius postulates, on the basis of "the similarity of the names," 24. There is no ancient warrant for this label. The fraginents were preserved by Alexander Polyhistor and are found in Eusebius, Praep. Evang. 9.19.4 (where the attribution to Demetrius is conjectural); Praep. Evang. 9.21.1-19; Praep. Evang. 9.29.1-3; Praep. Evang. 9.29.15; Praep. Evang. 9.29.16c; and Clement, Stromateis. 1.141.1-2. See Freudenthal, Hellenistische Studien, 219-23; Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria. 1:690-94; Wacholder, Eupolemus, 98-104; Walter, "Demetrios," in Fragmente ... Exegeten. 280-92; Holladay, Fragments, 1:51-91; Attridge, "Historiography," 161-62; J. Hanson, "Demetrius the Chronographer," in 077; 2:843-54; Goodman in Schurer, The History of the Jewish People, 3.1:513-17; Sterling, Historiography and Self-Definition. 153-67; Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 112-18. Demetrius's work is called "On the Kings of the Jews" by Clement, although most of what survives is concerned with the Pentateuch. 25. Bickerman, 'The Jewish Historian Demetrios," 77. 26. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria 2:960-61n.94. See the strong endorsement of this dating by Goodman, in Schurer, The History of the Jewish People, 3.1:515. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 115, belabors the uncertainty on the grounds that Demetrius does not actually say that he wrote under Philopator. 27. Doran, "Jewish Hellenistic Historians," 251. We cannot be sure how fully the preserved fragments represent the work of Demetrius. See Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1:691. 28. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1:692; Wacholder, Eupolemus, 100-101.

34


that Zipporah was descended from Abraham and Khettourah. He then fills out her genealogy by following the Septuagint version of Gen. 25:1-3 (against the Hebrew) in saying that Raguel was a descendant of Abraham in the fourth generation.He goes beyond the Septuagint in saying that Raguel is the father of Jethro. (The two are identified both in the Hebrew and in the Greek Bible.) Zipporah is thus in the sixth generation from Abraham. Demetrius next sets himself to show how Moses in the seventh generation could be contemporary with Zipporah in the sixth. He points out that "Abraham married Khettourah at the age of one hundred and forty, when Isaac, from whom Moses was descended, was already married." Hence the gap of one generation. He goes on to assert on the basis of Gen. 25:6 that Abraham had sent the children of his concubines to the East, and he concludes that this is how Moses was said to marry an Ethiopian woman — that is, Zipporah and the Ethiopian woman were one and the same. On the one hand, this passage shows that Demetrius was sensitive to "the requirements of scientific historical writing"^" in attempting to resolve chronological problems. On the other hand, the passage also reflects a typically Jewish concern by showing that Moses was not polygamous and did not marry outside his own people. The historical record can then lend its support to a legal view of Judaism on an issue which must have been highly relevant for Diaspora Judaism. Demetrius's method was certainly influenced by Hellenistic standards. Fraser and Wacholder have pointed out a general similarity to Eratosthenes in the critical attitude towards his sources.^' The entire work reflects the common Alexandrian procedure of aporiai kai lyseis ("problems and solut i o n s " ) . N o t all his aporiai are chronological. He also addresses such questions as why Joseph delayed to bring his relatives to Egypt and how the Israelites got their weapons at the time of the Exodus. The issues that Demetrius discusses would scarcely be of interest to anyone other than Jews.^^ Fraser contends that "the Jews of Alexandria did not need a chronological study of the book of Genesis."^^ We have seen that there is some concern to satisfy the requirements of Greek scientific histori29. We may accept the general view that Demetrius is the earliest witness to the LXX (with Ezekiel the tragedian, who may have been roughly contemporary). For further evidence of his use of the LXX, see Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 2:961n.98. 30. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1:692. Also 1:509-10 on the importance of chronology in the work of Manetho. Wacholder, Eupolemus, 103, points out that Demetrius is more restrained than Manetho on the mythical period. 31. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1:692-94; Wacholder, Eupolemus, 104. 32. Hengel, "Anonymitat," 236; Walter, "Demetrios," 281. 33. So also Sterling, Historiography and Self-Definition, 162; Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 117. 34. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1:693.


35

ography. Demetrius evidently assumed a readership whieh used the Greek language and was aware of Hellenistic critical standards. But the Jews of Alexandria may well have constituted such an audience by the end of the third century B.C.E., and it was precisely the educated Jews who needed a chronological study of Genesis. The credibility of the biblical record had to be established in face of the growing critical awareness of the Hellenistic Jews themselves. Fraser tentatively suggests that Demetrius wished to refute Manetho's hostile account of the Exodus, but there is no trace of polemic in Demetrius, so such a refutation would be very indirect. On the other hand, the demonstration that Moses did not marry outside his people had very direct relevance for the Hellenistic Jews. Demetrius would surely have welcomed, and perhaps hoped for. Gentile readers, but his work can be most fully understood as an attempt to shape the self-understanding of the Jewish community. What survives of Demetrius's history is too fragmentary to permit a full grasp of his understanding of Judaism. He was obviously attached to the Torah and was concerned to establish its credibility. He dealt with it as history that might be compared with the histories of other peoples. The surviving fragments do not explicitly discuss the Jewish law, but the identification of the Cushite woman as a descendant of Abraham makes it probable that he saw Judaism as a "covenantal nomism" in which it was important to remain within the bounds of the chosen people by keeping its laws. He lacks the tendencies to syncretism and to symbolism which are common in other Jewish Hellenistic writers, and he gives an impression of narrow concentration on the Torah, which is quite rare. Yet in attempting to establish the credibility of the Torah for Gentile or Hellenized Jew, he accepted Hellenistic forms of thought as the framework for his presentation and helped lay the foundation for the fusion of Jewish tradition and Hellenistic culture.

The Followers of Demetrius Demetrius had few followers in his detailed exegetical approach to Jewish history. Aristeas, sometimes called "the exegete," may have been a kindred spirit, but his work "On the Jews" survives only in a single fragment. This fragment is entirely devoted to Job. Its dependence on the Septuagint of Job is evident from several factors. Job is identified with lobab of Gen. 36:33. The Hebrew forms of the names would not suggest the identifi35. Praep. Evang. 9.25.!-4. See Freudenthal, Hellenistische Studien, 136-43; Walter, Fragmente... Exegeten, 293-96; Holladay, Fragments, 1:261-75; R. Doran, "Aristeas the Exegete," in OTP 2:855-59; idem, "Jewish Hellenistic Historians," 251-54; Goodman, in Schiirer, The History of the Jewish People, 3.1:525-26; Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 118-20.

36


cation. Job's homeland is given as Ausitis, as in the Septuagint. The statement that Job's mother was Bassara is most easily explained from the LXX of Gen. 36:33, lobab huios Zara ek Bosorras, where Bosorra represents the place name Bozra of the Hebrew. The friends of Job are called basileus, tyrannos, and basileus as in the Septuagint, and there are further verbal correspondences.^^ There are also striking correspondences between Aristeas and the addition to the LXX Job in 42:17. Both assert that Job is descended from Esau and from Bassara. Ausitis is located on the borders of Edom and Arabia, and Job is identified with lobab. Freudenthal argued that the addition to the Septuagint was dependent on Aristeas, and this position is accepted by Walter, but the relationship may be more complex. LXX Job 42:17 claims to be derived from "a Syriac book," and there are minor differences between the two.^'' Both may depend on an exegetical tradition. None of this is of much help for dating Aristeas since we cannot date the translation of LXX Job. The possible time period is approximately 25060 B.C.E. (the time of Polyhistor). Whether this Aristeas is at all related to the pseudonymous Aristeas of the Letter to Philocrates is doubtful. Walter categorically rejects any relation.^^ It is conceivable that this work of Aristeas is the referent in the Letter of Aristeas 6: "On a previous occasion also I transmitted to you an exposition of matters I deemed worthy of record concerning the race of the Jews which I received from the most erudite High Priests in the most erudite land of Egypt." In view of the lack of anything that could be construed as propaganda in the fragment of Aristeas's "On the Jews," it is most unlikely that the two authors were the same. If the pseudonymous writer of the Letter did mean to take the name of this Aristeas, he would presumably have taken him for a Greek, Gentile, author. The affinity of Aristeas with Demetrius lies in his exegetical interest. While he lacked the latter's complicated chronological calculations (insofar as we can tell from the surviving fragment), he too was not content to repeat the biblical story. He wanted to tie up loose ends and resolve the historical and geographical problems. So he identified Job with lobab and thereby provided a specific location for Ausitis. In theology, Aristeas appears quite Deuteronomic. Job is tested, suffers patiently, and is rewarded. Aristeas avoids the perplexing divine speech to Job in Job 3 8 ^ 1 and takes no note of Job's complaints. The supernatural element is minimized (in strong contrast to the later Testament of Job). The reference to Job's resurrection, which Is 36. Walter, Fragmente . . . Exegeten, 293. 37. In Aristeas, Job is a son of Esau; in LXX Job, a great-grandson. LXX Job also says that Eliphaz was among the sons of Esau. Aristeas may have known this tradition and changed Job's genealogy to make them contemporary. 38. Walter, Fragmente . . . Exegeten, 294.


37

found in LXX Job 42:17a, is absent here, but this was possibly a later addition to the Septuagint. In view of the brevity of the fragment, we cannot be sure whether the "prologue in heaven" was omitted by Aristeas or by Polyhistor. Aristeas does, however, go beyond the tradition in one respect. The striking formulation that "God admired his courage" has no biblical basis and puts the emphasis on the virtue in a way that is Hellenistic rather than Hebraic. (We shall find analogies to this development in Part Two below when we discuss the approaches to Jewish identity through ethics and piety.) The fragment of Aristeas is too brief to permit any definite conclusions, but the impression we are given is that a traditional Deuteronomic theology is being adapted for a Hellenized audience through a retelling of history that still endeavors to be faithful to the biblical account. One other name may be associated with Demetrius, that of a historian Philo, called "Philo the Elder" by Josephus. He is mentioned twice, by Clement (Stromateis, 1.141) and Josephus (Ag. Ap. 1.218) in the sequence Demetrius, Philo, and Eupolemus. Clement says that he (like Demetrius) wrote on the kings of the Jews but that he did not agree with Demetrius. Josephus seems to regard all three as pagan authors and to have no direct knowledge of them. In short, we know nothing whatever about the nature of this author's history. Some scholars have even wondered whether he is not identical with Philo the epic poet. His separate existence has been defended by Walter.

History a n d R o m a n c e

Artapanus Demetrius and (insofar as we can judge) Aristeas represent sober attempts to present the Jewish tradition to the Hellenistic world. They depart from the biblical text only to clarify it and resolve its problems. A very different use of the tradition is found in Artapanus, who was arguably the most colorful of all the Hellenistic Jewish writers. 39. Ibid., 295. So also Doran, "Jewish Hellenistic Historians," 254. 40. Three fragments of Artapanus are preserved in Praep. Evang. 9.18, 23, and 27, dealing respectively with Abraham, Joseph, and Moses. The Moses fragment is partially paralleled in Clement. Stromateis, 1.23.154. 2-3. See Freudenthal, Hellenistische Studien. 143-74; K. I. Merentitis, Ho loudaios Logios Artapanos kai to Ergon auton (Athens: Murtidos, 1961); D. L. Tiede, The Charismatic Figure as Miracle Worker (SBhDS 1; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1972) 146-71; Walter, Fragmente ... Historiker, 121-43; C. R. Holladay, Theios Aner in Hellenistic Judaism (SBLDS 40; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1977) 199-232; idem. Fragments, 1:189-243; Attridge. "Historiography," 166-68; J. J. Collins, "Artapanus." in OTP 2:889-903; Goodman, in Schurer, The History of the Jewish People. 3.1:521-25; Doran, "Jewish Hellenis-

38


The date of Artapanus is far from certain. Since he depended on the Septuagint^' and was used by Polyhistor, he must have written somewhere between 250 and 60 B.C.E.^^ Three considerations may help to specify the date further. Lucien Cerfaux has argued that certain passages in Artapanus reflect an attempt by Ptolemy IV Philopator (222-205 B.C.E.) to assimilate Jews to the worship of Dionysus.*^ Such an attempt is explicitly alleged in 3 Mace. 2:29-30, but 3 Maccabees is of questionable value as historical evidence.*'' An enigmatic passage in Artapanus {Praep. Evang. 9.27.24-27) tells how the king bids Moses speak the name of his God and then writes the name on a tablet and seals it. Cerfaux relates this to the evidence of the Schubart Papyrus that Philopator attempted to organize the cult of Dionysus by requiring those who practiced initiation to deposit their sacred doctrine (hieros logos) sealed and signed with their names.'*^ According to Praep. Evang. 9,27.20 the Egyptian Chenephres required the Jews to wear linen garments. Cerfaux takes this also as an allusion to the attempted assimilation to the cult of Dionysus. If Artapanus is indeed referring indirectly to measures taken by Philopator, then we must emphasize that he regards them negatively, as an imposition on Judaism. In no case is he promoting a Jewish Dionysiac cult. Whether in fact Philopator did take such measures against the Jews is still uncertain, but Cerfaux's theory would provide an explanation for these passages in Artapanus, which are otherwise very puzzling. On Cerfaux's theory, Artapanus would have written during the time of Philopator or shortly thereafter.

tic Historians," 257-63; A. J. Droge, Homer or Moses? Early Christian Interpretations of the History of Culture (TQbingen: Molir Siebeclc, 1989) 25-35; Sterling, Historiography and SelfDefinition, 167-86; J. M. G. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora from Alexander to Trajan (323 BCE-II7CE) (Edinburgh: Clark, 1996) 127-32; Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 8789; 150-51; 155-60. 41. Freudenthal, Hellenistische Studien, 216. The verbal correspondences are closest in the account of the plagues. 42. A. M. Denis (Introduction, 257) suggests a date in the time of Philopator (221-204 B . C . E . ) , following a suggestion of L. Cerfaux ("Influence des Mysteres sur le Judaisme Alexandrin avant Philon," in Recueil L. Cerfaux [BETL 6; Gembloux: Duculot, 1954] 1:8185). Wacholder (Eupolemus, 106n.40) suggests the early second century. Hengel ("Anonymitat," 24) suggests the second century. Walter (Fragmente . . . Historiker, 125) and K. I. Merentitis (Ho loudaios Logis. 9) propose a date about 100 B.C.E. 43. Cerfaux, "Influence des Mystferes," 1:81-85. Philopator's interest in the Dionysus cult is well attested (Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1:202). 44. Philopator is said to require that the Jews be registered and "branded on their bodies by fire with the ivy-leaf symbol of Dionysus." Cf. 2 Mace. 6:7-8, which says that in the persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes Jews in Jerusalem were compelled "to wear ivy wreaths and walk in the Dionysiac procession." Judaism was occasionally confused with the cult of Dionysus because of the nature of the celebration of Tabernacles (see Plutarch, Quaestiones Convivales 4.6 [671-72]). 45. For the text of the papyrus, see Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 2:345-46n.ll4. It is debated whether the decree was intended to promote or arrest the growth of the Dionysus cult.


39

A second possible clue to the date arises from the mention of the disease elephantiasis in Praep. Evang. 9.27.20. Despite a statement in Plutarch that this disease was first identified in the time of Asclepiades of Prusa, who flourished in the first century B.C.E.,*'^ it had already been the subject of a treatise falsely ascribed to Democritus and believed to be the work of Bolus of Mendes in Egypt, who was a contemporary of Callimachus in the third century B.C.E.*^ Artapanus could have referred to it at any later time, but he would have had more reason to single it out for mention if it were newly identified when he wrote. The third consideration is provided by the statement in Praep. Evang. 9.27.7 that Moses included Egyptian farmers in his army. Ptolemy IV Philopator was the first Ptolemy to permit the Egyptian peasantry to bear arms in his service, before the battle of Raphia in 217 B.C.E.'*^ The allusion by Artapanus to peasant participation in Moses' army is not prompted by the biblical account, nor by the polemics of Egyptians such as Manetho. It may be taken to reflect the historical development in the time of Philopator. All these specific clues point to a date at the end of the third century B.C.E., and there is nothing against such a date. But none of these considerations is conclusive. Artapanus may have written at any time in the period 250-100 B.C.E.*^ That he wrote in Egypt cannot be doubted. All the fragments, including the one on Abraham, are set in Egypt. Within Egypt we need not necessarily think of Alexandria. Artapanus has little in common with the known Jewish literature of Alexandria and may well have lived in another settlement.^** While Demetrius had been content to wrestle with the internal problems of the biblical text, Artapanus is engaged in what might be called "com46. Plutarch, Quaestiones Convivales, 8.9.1. 47. Wacholder, Eupolemus, 106, ii. 40. On Bolus see H, Diels, Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker {m ed.; Berlin: Weidmann, 1956) 2:216. 48. See W. W. Tarn, Hellenistic Civilization (New York: World, 1961) 179. I owe this suggestion to Prof. John Strugnell. 49. For further discussion of the dating, see Goodman, in Schurer, The History of the Jewish People, 3.1:523-24. 50. Fraser argues that Artapanus "is familiar with the native life of Egypt and the purely priestly traditions" and suggests that, as his Persian name might suggest, he was "a Jew of mixed descent, possibly resident in another centre such as Memphis" {Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1:706; 2:985n.l99). Fraser notes the occurrence of related Persian names in Egypt and the village of Artapatou, near Oxyrhyncus, attested from the third century C.E. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 127-28, suggests "the Hellenized milieu of a country town (perhaps Heliopolis)." Hengel ("Anonymitat," 239) tentatively suggests that Artapanus's work "konnte auf Grund ihrer politische Aiisprtiche und ihrer synkretistischen Tendenz aus der Militarkolonie um den jiidischen Tempel van Leontopolis staramen" (cf. also Holladay, Theios Aner, 217). There is nothing to tie Artapanus specifically to either Memphis or Leontopolis, but there is nothing to tie him to Alexandria either. In qualification of Fraser, it should be said that Artapanus appears to have derived his knowledge of Egyptian customs primarily from Greek sources, such as Hecataeus, rather than from Egyptian priests (see Wacholder, Eupolemus. 80).

40


petitive historiography" (with the understanding that historiography here ean include a liberal component of legend and romance).^' Abraham, Joseph, and Moses are each presented as founders of culture. Abraham taught the Egyptians to study the stars. Joseph organized the division of the land and discovered measurements. Moses is described at greatest length. He Is identified with Mousaeus, teacher of Orpheus (reversing the relationship in Greek lore), and also with the god Hermes. He is credited with a wide variety of discoveries and with establishing the Egyptian animal cults. He is also credited with a great military success in a campaign against Ethiopia and with supernatural powers in his encounter with the pharaoh to secure the release of the Hebrews. The competitive aspect of his presentation can be seen most directly by comparison with the unflattering account of the Jews preserved in the history of Manetho.^^ Manetho (or Pseudo-Manetho) had alleged that Moses forbade his people to worship the gods or abstain from the flesh of the sacred animals (Ag. Ap. 1.239). Artapanus claimed that it was Moses who established these cults. Manetho alleged that Moses had invaded Egypt (Ag. Ap. 1.241). Artapanus claimed that Moses restrained Raguel and the Arabs from invading. According to Manetho, the pharaoh had to protect the sacred animals from Moses (Ag. Ap. 1.244). Artapanus claims that the pharaoh buried the animals which Moses had made sacred, since he wished to conceal Moses' inventions. In Manetho's account, the pharaoh sought refuge in Ethiopia when Moses invaded (Ag. Ap. 1.246). In Artapanus, Moses conducted a campaign against Ethiopia on behalf of the pharaoh. In view of these correspondences, it seems highly probable that Artapanus intended, inter alia, to refute Manetho's version of Jewish origins. How far that version represented a wider Egyptian polemic is not clear, but at least some of Manetho's charges were derived from an older tradition.Unlike Josephus, Artapanus does not set out the material he wishes to refute. His polemic is carried on implicitly in the course of his own account. The refutation of writers such as Manetho is only the negative side of Artapanus's work. More positively he portrays each of his subjects, espe51. See esp. Braun, History and Romance, followed by Tiede, The Charismatic Figure, 149-50. Holladay (Theios Aner, 215) categorizes it as "national romantic history" and classifies it with Hecataeus's work "On the Egyptians." Sterling calls it "romantic national history" (Historiography and Self-Defmition, 186). R. 1. Pervo, Profit with Delight: The Literary Genre of the Acts of the Apostles (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987) 119-21, classifies it as a Jewish novel. 52. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 129 comments: "In an age when ethnic groups bolstered their pride with tales of national heroes, Artapanus portrayed Moses as the greatest hero of them all." 53. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1:705-6; Holladay, Theios Aner, 213. 54. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1:508-9. Hecataeus already had the story that the Jews were descended from foreigners expelled by the Egyptians during a plague. Manetho goes further in claiming that Moses was leader of a group of "lepers and other polluted persons."


41

cially Moses, as a founder of culture and attributes to each inventions which are beneficial to humanity.^^ Here again the claim was competitive. While the romantic legends of the Egyptians extolled the greatness of Sesostris and Nektanebo, and others recounted the glorified exploits of Semiramis, Nebuchadnezzar, or even Alexander, Artapanus claims for Moses accomplishments elsewhere attributed to others, so that "not only does he surpass each one individually, but also all of them combined."^^ The correspondences with Sesostris are especially striking.Sesostris was credited with being the first Egyptian to build warships, with dividing Egypt into thirty-six nomes, and with organizing Egyptian religion. All of these accomplishments are claimed for Moses by Artapanus. The motif of a campaign against Ethiopia was widespread. Semiramis was said to have subdued it. Cambyses failed. Sesostris was said to have been the first man to conquer Ethiopia and the only Egyptian to rule over it. The Moses of Artapanus conquers it with a nonprofessional army. Not only does Moses outshine the heroes of other peoples and especially of the Egyptians.^* He also outshines their gods. The Egyptian goddess Isis was taught by H e r m e s . M o s e s "was deemed worthy of divine honor by the priests and called Hermes." (Hermes was portrayed by Hecataeus as the culture-bringer s u p r e m e . T h e subordination is explicit in Praep. Evang. 9.21.'M, where Moses strikes the earth with his rod and Artapanus adds that "the earth is Isis."^' He was also called Mousaeus by the Greeks and "this Mousaeus was the teacher of Orpheus."^^ Artapanus's zeal to exalt his national heroes above those of other na55. Sterling, Historiography and Self-Definition, 175. 56. Braun, History and Romance, 26. See also Tiede, The Charismatic Figure, 151-77. Cf. Plutarch (Isis and Osiris 24 [360 B]): "Mighty deeds of Semiramis are celebrated among the Assyrians; and mighty deeds of Sesostris in Egypt, and the Phrygians even to this day call brilliant and marvellous exploits 'manic' because Manes, one of their early kings, proved himself a good man and exercised a vast influence among them." 57. Tiede, The Charismatic Figure, 153-59. For Sesostris see Diodorus 1.54-57; Herodotus 2.102-109. 58. Droge, Homer or Moses? 25-26, notes that "Artapanus challenges the view of Hecataeus by demonstrating that the apparent Egyptian contributions to the advance of civilization were actually introduced by the Jewish heroes." 59. Diodorus 1.17.3; 1.27.4; Tiede, The Charismatic Figure, 155. 60. Diodorus 1.15.9-16,2; Droge, Homer or Moses? 26-27. See G. Mussies, "The Interpretatio Judaica of Thot-Hermes," in M. H. van Voss et al., eds.. Studies in Egyptian Religion: Dedicated to Professor Jan Zandee (Leiden: Brill, 1982) 89-120. 61. The identification is also found in Diodorus 1.12.4; Plutarch, Isis and Osiris 32 and 38. 62. In Greek tradition Orpheus is usually the teacher, not the pupil, of Mousaeus. According to Hecataeus (Diodorus 1.96.4-9), Orpheus brought back cultural and religious lore to Greece from his travels in Egypt. Artapanus is here claiming that Moses was the ultimate source also of Greek culture. See Walter, Fragmente . . . Historiker, 123; Tiede, The Charismatic Figure, 152.

42


tions not only led him beyond the traditional history. It also led to a view of Judaism sharply at variance with the Deuteronomic tradition. While other Jewish writings use the story of Abraham to denounce astrology, Artapanus has Abraham teach it to the Egyptians.More strikingly, he says that Moses established the animal cults,^* which were so frequently the objects of derisive polemic at the hands of other writers,^^ and even claims with apparent approval that the Egyptian priests identified Moses with the god Hermes. While all of these views must be considered syncretistic, Artapanus still contends that the god of the Jews is "the master of the universe." The pagan gods, including the animals worshipped by the Egyptians, are explained euhemeri Stic ally as inventions which were useful to h u m a n k i n d . T h i s involves a positive evaluation of the pagan cults, which flies in the face of all Jewish tradition, but it also undermines their divinity.^'' The animals worshipped by the Egyptians are "only" animals which Moses judged to be useful. Hermes, though he is superior to Isis, is really only the man Moses, and great though he is, Moses is still human. It is crucial to the theology of Artapanus that the god of the Jews is never demythologized in this euhemeristic way.^^ On the contrary, the very endorsement of the pagan di63. Abraham is also a teacher of astrology in Pseudo-Eupolemus (Praep. Evang. 9.17.3). Cf. Am. 1.8.2 §§167-68, a passage which may be derived from Pseudo-Hecataeus. Contrast Abraham's rejection of astrology in Philo, De Abrahamo, 69-71, 77, and Jubilees 12:60. Also Sib. On 3:218-30 (where the reference is to the descendants of Abraham). See in general J, H. Charlesworth, "Jewish Astrology in the Talmud, Pseudepigrapha, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and Early Palestinian Synagogues," HTR 70 (1977) 183-200. The most striking endorsement of astrology by a Jewish author is found in the Treatise ofShem, on which see J. H. Charlesworth, "Rylands Syriac Ms. 44 and a New Addition to the Pseudepigrapha: The Treatise ofShem, Discussed and Translated," BJRL 60 (1978) 376-403. 64. This is apparent from Praep. Evang. 9.27.12: "the creatures which Moses had made sacred." Holladay (Theios Aner, 229-31) emphasizes that the ibis is not consecrated by Moses but by his associates and that Chenephres institutes the Apis cult, while Moses only explains that the bull is useful to humankind. Nonetheless, Moses has a causal role in both these cases. 65. E.g., Wisd. 13:10; Philo, De Decalogo 16; Sib. Or 3:218-36. 66. Euhemerism is the theory that the gods were originally kings and conquerors who brought benefits to humankind and that their worship arose as an expression of gratitude. The term is derived from Euhemerus of Messene, who put forward this theory about 300 B.C.E. 67. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 131n.l7, objects that "Divinity in the ancient world was a function of worship, and if . . . Artapanus presents a positive evaluation of these cults he must approve of the divine status thereby accorded." But Barclay fails to note that Artapanus only approves (patronizingly) of the cults as beneficial for the Egyptians. He does not say that Moses worshipped the "gods" he set up. D. Flusser and S. Amorai-Stark, "The Goddess Thermuthis, Moses, and Artapanus," Jewish Studies Quarterly 1(1993/94) 217-33, rightly note the utilitarian character of the cults, but go too far when they claim that Artapanus regarded Egyptian religion as foolishness. It was useful for the Egyptians, within its limitations. 68. Barclay's claim that Artapanus is "both a monotheist and a polytheist" (Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 132) can only be defended if "theist" is understood in two quite different senses in the two words. Artapanus approves of polytheism for the (inferior) Egyptians; monotheism may not be the right word for his own faith, but he is at least a henotheist, who believes that "the master of the universe" is superior to other deities.


43

vinities as useful for humanity shows their inferiority not only to the god of. the Jews but even to Moses. The piety of Artapanus is eonspicuously similar to that of Hellenistic paganism. He is especially interested in the miraculous, and even in the magical. While the Egyptian magicians might seem to be disparaged for their reliance on tricks and charms, great emphasis is placed on Moses' rod and on the mysterious power of the divine name.^^ In the events related to the Exodus, even when they are not based on the biblical account, Moses is clearly subordinate to his god. Yet for much of the narrative, the emphasis is on the human achievements of the Jewish heroes, in which God plays no explicit role. Even in the Exodus, God acts through Moses and is in effect the guarantor of his own people's superiority. A few passages suggest the traditional biblical theme of divine retribution in history. Chenephres contacts elephantiasis because of his treatment of the Jews. A priest who disparages the divine name which Moses wrote on a tablet is stricken with a convulsion. This kind of retribution is found in every religion that believes in a god (or gods) who is at all capable of showing displeasure, but at least the first case posits a special bond between God and the Jews. This bond, however, is the nearest Artapanus comes to anything that could be called covenantal. While Moses is credited with all kinds of inventions from waterworks to philosophy, he is conspicuously not presented as a lawgiver.™ The fact that the biblical story locates the giving of the law outside Egypt and after the Exodus cannot account for the omission, since Artapanus does refer to Moses' later life. The omission is all the more surprising in view of the focus on Moses as lawgiver in Hecataeus of Abdera, who was apparently one of Artapanus's sources.''^ Artapanus evidently thinks of Moses as national hero rather than as lawgiver. The purpose of the work is evidently to bolster the ethnic pride of 69. See Tiede, The Charismatic Figure, 166-74. This aspect of Artapanus was emphasized by Otto Weinreich, Gebet und Wunder (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1929). The most spectacular example is Moses' escape from prison in Praep. Evang. 9.27.23-26, but also the prominence given to the plagues. It is noteworthy that the citation in Clement plays down the miraculous element in Moses' escape from prison. According to the text in Eusebius, the doors opened automatds. In Clement they open "in accordance with the will of God." Also, Moses pronounces the divine name in pharaoh's ear and causes him to fall speechless. The name of the god of the Jews was noted for its potency in Hellenistic magic (M. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974] 1:260). 70. This point is rightly stressed by Droge, Homer or Moses? 29. Moses is identified with Hermes "on account of the interpretation of the sacred letters" {Praep. Evang. 9.27.6), but the letters in question are the Egyptian hieroglyphs (cf. Praep. Evang. 9.27.4) and associate Moses with Thoth (see Holladay, Theios Aner, 226). 71. For Artapanus's dependence on Hecataeus, see Freudenthal, Hellenistische Studien, 160-61; H. Willrich, Judaica (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1900) 111-16. Artapanus has numerous parallels with Diodorus Siculus, and Hecataeus is the most likely common source.

44


Jews, partly by refuting their detractors, such as Manetho, and partly by fabricating a more glorious history than that of other peoples. Such propaganda is directed to both Gentile and Jew, with the complementary objectives of inspiring respect from without and self-respect from within. The portraits of Abraham, Joseph, and especially Moses are determined, not by the biblical story, but by the demands of competitive historiography, which draws on the biblical material (among other sources) for its own purpose. Holladay concludes his analysis of Artapanus by claiming "that he was not totally without scruples, and that his faith imposed some restrictions on what he would allow. Indeed, his faith is the only plausible explanation of why he attempted what he dld."^'^ This assessment is valid only if faith is understood not as fidelity to the Mosaic law, or even a strict avoidance of other gods, but as faith in the superiority of the Jewish people, with its God and its heroes. The restrictions on what Artapanus would allow are quite simply determined by whatever would augment the glory of the Jews. He is not an assimilationist, but he is not devoted to holiness by separation either. He is concerned with the identity of the Jewish people. This identity must remain rooted in the tradition, but not necessarily in the articulation of that tradition found in the book of the Torah. It is enough that people be able to define their own identity in terms they can relate (however imaginatively) to the traditional heroes, just as Egyptians in the Hellenistic age could relate their identity to Sesostris, or Babylonians to Semiramis. The only fidelity required is that Jews maintain a distinct identity and affirm their superiority over against other peoples.''^ We do not know how widely this view of Judaism was shared, but it is unlikely to have been unique to Artapanus. Some modem scholars, even some who celebrate the diversity of ancient Judaism, have great difficulty in accepting it. So Erich Gruen asserts that not only would Egyptians not acknowledge Moses' initiation of animal worship but "Jews would certainly not take it seriously."^^ No doubt there were many Jews who would not take it seriously, but it is entirely gratuitous to suppose that all Jews were of one mind on this issue. There is indeed an element of humor in Artapanus, but it is humor directed against the Egyptian cults, not against Moses.''^ The competition for supremacy was not somber, but it was none the less real for that. To suggest that he wrote "tongue In cheek"''^ is to refuse to accept a view of 72. Holladay, Theios Aner, 232. 73. That Jewish solidarity is a virtue may also be implied: when Raguel wants to campaign against Egypt, Moses restrains him "taking thought of his compatriots." The reference here is almost certainly to the Jews in Egypt, not to the Egyptians. A similar moral is found in Greek Esther and 3 Maccabees. 74. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 158. 75. Attridge, "Historiography," 167-68. 76. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 159.


45

Judaism that departs so exuberantly from modern preconceptions of what Jews in antiquity would take seriously. Artapanus's theology is an offshoot of his politics. In this respect his attitude to the Egyptians is significant. Holladay has underlined the strongly pro-Egyptian cast of the fragments, in the sense that the Jewish heroes are consistently benevolent and beneficent to Egypt. Abraham, Joseph, and Moses are all consistently portrayed as introducing things that are beneficial for Egyptian life. Even the animal cults fall under this heading. Yet there is also considerable destruction of Egyptians not all required by the biblical account. Chenephres is smitten with elephantiasis, Egypt is ravaged by plagues and most of the temples are destroyed, and the Egyptians, apparently with their sacred animals, are killed at the Red Sea. In part, the benevolence of the Jews to the Egyptians is meant as a refutation of Manetho, but it also expresses Artapanus's attitude in his situation of exile.''^ The Jews bear the Egyptians no ill will. If friction arises, it is because of the envy of individual Egyptians such as Chenephres, or their abuse of the Jews. In this respect we may compare the attitudes towards the Gentiles in the stories of the eastern Diaspora, Esther and Daniel 1-6.''^ In each case, friction arises when a Jew (or Jews) has risen to a position of prominence. In each case, the Jews are benevolent and loyal subjects and do nothing to warrant the antagonism. But when conflict arises through the Gentiles' fault, the Jews prevail. The tales In Daniel emphasize the role of God in the triumph of the Jews. Those in Esther do not. In Artapanus the issue is not true religion. Moses does not even attempt to convert the Gentiles to the worship of the God of the Jews, and when the Jews are persecuted or treated badly {Praep. Evang. 9.27.2, 20) no reason is given. While Artapanus does not acknowledge the divinity of the Egyptian gods and rather demythologizes them, his attitude towards them is still positive. They are useful. There is no reason to oppose their cults. In fact, Jews encourage their cults. Problems arise only through the misguided opposition of some leaders to the Jews. From all of this we may wonder whether Artapanus wrote in a time of conflict. The generally positive attitude to the Egyptians makes it unlikely that there was any severe persecution in his time. Undoubtedly there were occasional local conflicts from the earliest settlement of Jews in Egypt. The writings of Manetho show that there was some anti-Jewish sentiment at the beginning of the Hellenistic age, even if this was no more than the disparage77. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 130, n. 14, objects to this statement on the grounds that Artapanus was fully "at home" in his Egyptian environment. But all three fragments deal with the exploits of Jews in Egypt, and it is reasonable to suppose that Artapanus was especially interested in stories of Jews in Diaspora situations, 78. See L, M. Wills, The Jew in the Court of the Foreign King (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990).

46


ment typically directed against otlier ethnic groups. The setting of Artapanus is adequately explained by this general background. On the other hand, the fact that the Egyptian rulers in Artapanus are consistently portrayed in a negative light makes it improbable that Artapanus wrote under a ruler who was particularly favorable to the Jews, such as Philometor. In all, then, Artapanus reflects an understanding of Judaism which is based on pride in the national tradition, but is prepared to treat that tradition in a rather plastic manner to bolster the identity of the Jews as a distinctive people worthy of respect In Hellenistic Egypt.

Eupolemus Artapanus provides the most elaborate example of "competitive historiography" which has survived from the Egyptian Diaspora. While he is extreme in his imaginative elaboration of the tradition, he represents a phenomenon which was widespread in Hellenistic Judaism, as can be seen from the wide distribution of the fragments of the genre which have survived. One of the most striking examples of "competitive historiography" appears to come not from the Hellenized Diaspora but from the heart of Judea in the wake of the Maccabean revolt. Eupolemus''^ is almost certainly the Eupolemus named in 1 Mace. 8:17-18 who was entrusted with a mission to Rome by Judas Maccabee about 160 B.C.E.^'^ The fact that he wrote his propagandistic history in Greek^^ is highly significant for our understanding of Judaism in this period. The Tendenz of the work bears a general similarity to Artapanus. "Moses was the first wise man; and he handed over the letters to the Jews first, the Phoenicians received them from the Jews, the Greeks from the 79. Praep. Evang. 9.26.1 (Clement, Stromateis, 1.153.4); 9.30.1-34.8 (Clement, Stroinateis, 1.130.3); 9.34.20; 9.39.2-5; Clement, Stromateis, 1.141.4-5. See Wacholder, Eupolemus; Walter, Fragmente . . . Historilier, 93-108; Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, 1:92-95; J. Giblet, "Eupoleme et I'historiographie du Judaisme hellenistique," ETL 63 (1963) 539-54; Holladay, Fragments, 1:93-156; Goodman, in Schiirer, Tfie History of the Jewish People, 3.1:517-21; F. Fallon, "Eupolemus," in OTP, 2:861-72; R. Doran, "Jewish Hellenistic Historians," 263-70; Attridge, "Historiography," 162-65; D. Mendels, The Land of Israel as a Political Concept in Hasmonean Literature (Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1987) 29-46; Droge, Homer or Moses? 13-19; Sterling, Historiography and Self-Defmition, 207-22; Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 138-46. 80. The mission is also recorded in Josephus, Ant. 12.10.6 §415 and 2 Mace. 4:11 (where the main reference is to Eupolemus's father John, who obtained royal privileges for the Jews in the time of Antiochus III). The date of Eupolemus is indicated in Clement, Stromateis, 1.141.4, where he calculates the total number of years from Adam to the fifth year of King Demetrius, which is usually taken as 158 B.C.E., the fifth year of Demetrius I. 81. That he also knew Hebrew is shown by the fact that he translates some terms in the passage on the temple which were not translated in the LXX (Walter, Fragmente... Historiker, 95). That he used both the Greek and the Hebrew text has been established since Freudenthal. Eupolemus's Greek style was pronounced "miserable" by Jacoby, PWRE, 6:1229.


47

Phoenicians." Moses is also noted as "the first who wrote laws for the Jews." The most lengthy fragment concerns the building of the temple. The detailed account of the building lends plausibility to the view that Eupolemus was inspired by the Maccabean purification of the temple.However, the account is embellished by the insertion of the purported letters of Solomon to the kings of Egypt and of Tyre and Sidon and their replies. The tone of the correspondence implies the superiority of Solomon. Indeed, the very choice of Solomon as the focal figure suggests a measure of triumphalism. Eupolemus details the conquests of David and Solomon in the Seleucid territory but emphasizes their good relations with Egypt. Hengel has rightly seen here a reflection of Maccabean politics.The concluding verse of this fragment contains the striking information that Solomon gave the king of Tyre "a pillar of gold which was set up in Tyre in the Temple of Zeus." Apparently Eupolemus was not embarrassed by this contribution to a foreign God.^* Yet in another fragment he explains the Babylonian exile as a punishment for sacrificing to a golden idol named Baal. Even in this passage there is no hostility to Gentiles. Nebuchadnezzar only decides to campaign against Jerusalem when he hears of the prophecy of Jeremiah. The Jews are apparently forbidden to engage in idol worship, but the Gentiles are not criticized for having their own religions, and Solomon is not criticized for indirectly contributing to them.

Pseudo-Eupolemus ? The authenticity of another fragment attributed to Eupolemus by Eusebius is d i s p u t e d . T h i s fragment is usually identified as Samaritan, because it says 82. Walter, Fragmente . . . Historiker, 96; Dalbert, Die Theologie der iietlenistischjudischen Missionsliteratur, 42; Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, 1:94. 83. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, 1:93. 84. Cf. the gold shield sent to Rome in 1 Mace. 14:24, but contrast the sensitivity of 2 Mace. 4:18-20. When Jason sent envoys to Tyre with 300 silver drachmas for the sacrifice of Hercules, the envoys diverted it to the construction of triremes {war vessels). A parallel to this incident in Eupolemus is found in the lone fragment of Theophilus {Praep. Evang. 9.34.19), who says that Solomon gave the king of Tyre all the gold that was left over at the building of the temple, and that the king used it on a statue of his daughter. 85. Eusebius {Praep. Evang. 9.17), which is said to be from Eupolemus, "On the Jews." Another fragment (Praep. Evang. 9.18.2) appears to be a briefer summary of the same source, but is said to be from an anonymous work. See Wacholder, Eupolemus. 287-93; Walter, Fragmente . . . Historiker, 137-40; Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, 1:88-92; H. G. Kippenberg, Garizim und Synagoge (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1971) 80-83; Holladay, Fragments, 1:157-87; Goodman, in Schurer, The History of the Jewish People, 3.1:528-31; R. Doran, "Pseudo-Eupolemus," in OTP, 2:873-82; idem, "Jewish Hellenistic Historians," 270-74; Attridge, "Historiography," 165-66; Droge, Homer or Moses? 19-25; Sterling, Historiography and Self-Definition, 187-206; Gruen, Hellenism and Heritage, 146-50. Doran is exceptional in defending the attribution to Eupolemus.

48

NATIONAL A N D POLITICAL IDENTITY

that Abraham was received as a guest at the temple Argarizim, translated as "the mount o^the Most High God," where, in reversal of the biblical account, he received gifts from Melchizedek. In Genesis, Melchizedek is king of Salem. The Septuagint of Gen. 33:18 reads kai elthen lakob eis Salem polin Sikimdn. Here Salem is "a city of Shechem." {The Hebrew sdlem, "safely," is construed as a place name.) The fragment attributed to Eusebius goes beyond the Septuagint in identifying the location of Abraham's meeting with Melchizedek as the temple on Mt. Gerizim. Most scholars have inferred that he must have been a Samaritan, since the opposition of Gerizim and Jerusalem was one of the issues that defined Samaritans over against Jews.^^ The fact that Abraham is said to have come into Phoenicia (Praep. Evang. 9.17.4) is also thought to favor Samaritan authorship, since the Samaritans were known to refer to themselves as Sidonians.^'' It is probable, however, that Pseudo-Eupolemus wrote before the schism between the Samaritans and the Jews reached its final and irreparable stage. Recent research has shown that the sectarian redaction of the Samaritan Pentateuch should be dated to the Hasmonean period and that the final break was most probably a result of the destruction of Shechem and ravaging of Gerizim by John Hyrcanus.^^ While the Samaritans were certainly distinct from the Jews throughout the postexilic period, and relations between the two communities were often strained, especially after the building of the temple on Mt. Gerizim in the early Greek period and the Hellenizing of Shechem under Antiochus IV,^^ the identity of both groups was still grounded in the same biblical tradition. The disputed fragment was dependent on the Septuagint.^*' Doran has argued strongly that the fragment could derive from Eupolemus, who identified Jerusalem as the city of Solomon and therefore would have sought a different identification for Salem.^' If this fragment is authentic, and the work of a Jewish author, it reflects a remarkably ecumenical spirit, which was prepared to recognize Gerizim as well as Jerusalem as a mountain of the Most High. 86. Jewish tradition identified Salem with Jerusalem (e.g., Josephus, Ant. 1.10.2 §180). See B. Z. Wacholder, "Pseudo-Eupolemus' Two Greek Fragments on the Life of Abraham," HUCA 34 (1963) 107. 87. According to Josephus, the Shechemites at the time of Alexander "were Hebrews but were called the Sidonians of Shechem" {Ant. 11.8.6 §344). Again in Am. 12.5.5 §§257-64 the Samaritans who appeal to Antiochus Epiphanes refer to themselves as "Sidonians in Shechem" and protest that they are "Sidonians by origin." Sidonians were, of course, Phoenicians. 88. J. D. Purvis, The Samaritan Pentateuch and the Origin of the Samaritan Sect (HSM 2; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1968) 86-118. On the history of the Samaritan schism, see further Kippenberg, Garizim und Synagoge, 33-93. 89. Purvis, The Samaritan Pentateuch, 98-112. 90. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, 1:89; Walter, Fragmente . . . Historiker, 138-39. The forms of the names provide the decisive evidence. 91. Doran, "Pseudo-Eupolemus," 875; idem, "Jewish Hellenistic Historians," 272-73; Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 146-47.


49

This possibility should certainly not be ruled out of court in the preHasmonean period, but it is perhaps easier to suppose that this fragment was written by a Samaritan.^2 (hat case, the conventional label "PseudoEupolemus" is misleading, as there is no reason to believe that the anonymous author attributed his work to Eupolemus. If it is the work of a Samaritan, as most scholars think, there is no clear evidence as to whether he wrote in Samaria or in E g y p t . H i s use of the Septuagint, which might be taken to favor an Egyptian origin, must be balanced against the parallels with the Enoch traditions and the Genesis Apocryphon from Qumran, and, in any case, neither the Septuagint nor the supposedly Palestinian traditions can be restricted to a single geographical location. "Pseudo-Eupolemus" drew not only on the biblical tradition. There are also indications of influence by Berossus.^"* The work is marked by a euhemeristic attitude to pagan gods (the first giant was Belus, who is Kronos, who begat Belus and Cham) and by an attempt to correlate the figures of various mythologies. Belus is Kronos; Atlas is the same as Enoch. The discovery of astrology is traced ultimately to Enoch, indicating a familiarity with the traditions reflected in 1 Enoch. The main focus of the narrative is on Abraham, "who surpassed all men in nobility and wisdom, who also discovered the Chaldean science, and who, on account of his piety, was well-pleasing to God." Abraham teaches the Phoenicians "the changes of the sun and the moon and all things of that kind" and also teaches the priests at Heliopolis astrology and other sciences."Pseudo-Eupolemus" seems to draw on more of the biblical framework than Artapanus did. Abraham's sojourn in Phoenicia involves the exploits recorded in Genesis 14, while his so92. Jewish attitudes to Samaritans in the early second century B . C . E . are reflected in Ben Sira's reference to "the foolish people that live in Shechem" (Sir. 50:26), but Sirach did not necessarily speak for all Jews. 93. Hengel (Judaism and Hellenism. 1:88), Wacholder (Eupolemus. 289), and Walter (Fragmente . . . Historiker, 139) all favor Palestinian origin. G. Vermes (Scripture and Tradition in Judaism [Leiden: Brill, 1961] 124) assumes Alexandrian provenance. On the Samaritans in Alexandria, see Josephus, Ant. 13.3.4 §§74-79 and in Egypt generally. Ant. 12.1.1 §§710. 94. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism. 1:89; Wacholder, Eupolemus, 288; P. Schnabel, Berossos und die babylonisch-hellenistische Literatur (Berhn: Teubner, 1923) 67-69; Sterling, Historiography and Self-Definition, 201-2. The influence of Berossus is apparent in the foundation of Babylon by Bel (Belus). It is possible that the claim that the builders of the tower were giants reflects the influence of Hesiod's Theogony. 95. Cf. Artapanus, above, for Abraham as a teacher of astrology. Many scholars have held that Sib. Or. 3:218-36 is a direct criticism of Pseudo-Eupolemus; so J. Geffcken, Composition und Entstehungszeit der Oracula Sibyllina (TU 8/1; Leipzig: Hinrichs 1902) 7; A. Peretti, IM Sibilla Babilonese netla Propaganda Ellenistica (Biblioteca di Cultura 21; Firenze: La Nuova Italia Editrice, 1943) 131; Wacholder. Eupolemus, 290-91. The evidence for direct dependence is not, however, sufficient. See V. Nikiprowetzky, Troisieme Sibylle (Etudes Juives 9; Paris: Mouton, 1970) 127-33; J. J. Collins, The Sibylline Oracles of Egyptian Judaism (SBLDS 13; Missoula, Mont.; Scholars Press, 1974) 164.

50


joum in Egypt is occasioned by a famine and involves the wife/sister episode of Genesis 12. However, "Pseudo-Eupolemus" is no exegete. He adds freely to the biblical story. His conception of his religion is closely similar to that of Artapanus. It finds its identity in a glorified tradition, but one that is placed in a cosmopolitan, syncretistic setting. Hengel claims that an essential difference can be found between "the universalist breadth of the Abraham narratives in the anonymous Samaritan and the Judean nationalistic narrowness of the fragments of Eupolemus, where even the international relationships of Solomon only serve to the greater glory of the Jewish king and the sanctuary built by him." He further claims that it makes a significant difference whether Abraham or Moses appears as the first wise man, for "in one case the universalist tendency predominates, and in the other the nationalist."^^ Abraham had come from Chaldaea and lived among the Phoenicians and Egyptians. Unlike Moses, he was not associated with the restrictive aspects of the Jewish law. He was a favorite figure in the syncretistic literature of the Diaspora, as can be seen most clearly in the genealogical fictions of Cleodemus Malchus. Yet, both Eupolemus and "Pseudo-Eupolemus" were concerned to assert the superiority of their tradition and to build a cosmopolitan platform on which that superiority could be displayed. Eupolemus may be a nationalist, but he is no isolationist. His vision of Judaism includes alliances with other peoples and a tolerance of their religion. On the other hand, the more obviously syncretistic "Pseudo-Eupolemus" and Artapanus are universalistic only in a limited way. They are not assimllatlonists. They retain the sense of the value of their distinct identity and bolster it with a claim of superiority. Again, as is surely apparent from Artapanus, the figure of Moses could be used in a highly syncretistic way. Eupolemus mentions the law only in passing, despite its major role in the Maccabean movement, as recorded in the books of Maccabees, and even despite its potential for propaganda In the Hellenistic world. The identity of Judaism for Eupolemus is not rooted in the law. He takes the biblical record as a point of departure but adds to it freely.^'' His view of Judaism can be defined by association with Moses, Solomon, and the major figures of the tradition. One gets in, presumably, by birth, and stays in by not denying one's heritage. The ideals of Judaism are the popular ideals of the Hellenistic world: to be first in everything that is beneficial to humankind. The primacy of Judaism is never abandoned, but it is seen in the context of a common human enterprise.

96. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, 1:95. Cf. D. Georgi, The Opponents of Paul in Second Corinthians {Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986) 49-60. 97. As Hengel also notes, Eupolemus handles the biblical text with great freedom. Wacholder also points out that "Eupolemus' reports frequently contradict the traditions, creating more discord than do any differences found in the Bible" (Eupolemus. 70).


51

Thallus and Cleodemus Two other historical writers, Thallus and Cleodemus M a l c h u s , w e r e thought by Freudenthal to be Samaritans.Thallus wrote later than Alexander Polyhistor, and his work Is lost except for eight scattered fragments which have been collected by Jacoby.*'''^ His history apparently extended from the fall of Troy to the time of Christ,^^' but the surviving fragments deal mainly with the mythological Vrzeit and refer to Bel, Kronos, and Ogygus. References to the time of Cyrus also survive. The supposition that he was a Samaritan rests on the identification of the historian with the Thallus mentioned by Josephus in Ant. 18.6.4 §167, who was a Samaritan by birth and was a freedman of Tiberius. It has also been suggested that he is identical with the figure named in an inscription, Tiberius Claudius Thallus, and even with the secretary of Augustus mentioned by Suetonius, in Augustus 67,2.***^ Whether the writer was in fact identical with any of these figures remains hypothetical and has been disputed. ^^"^ Insofar as one may judge from such scanty evidence, his work has some affinity with that of Pseudo-Eupolemus and the identification with the Samaritan mentioned in Josephus is plausible. There is no reason to regard Cleodemus as a Samaritan. He is even more poorly attested than Thallus. He is cited briefly by Josephus, and again, from Josephus, by Eusebius.*'** He is called a "prophet," but the fragment makes it clear that he wrote a propagandistic history which endeavored to derive various peoples from the children of Abraham. Abraham's sons Apher and Aphras are said to have given their names to the continent Africa and the city Aphras, and another son, Assurim, to Assyria. The first two join Heracles in a battle against Libya and Antaeus, and Heracles marries the daughter of Aphras. From their son Diodorus a barbarian people, the Sophacians, are descended. 98. The name is given as Malchos in Josephus, but Malchas in Eusebius. 99. Freudenthal, Hellenistische Studien, 100. The epic poet Theodotus, who was also thought to be Samaritan, will be discussed below. 100. Jacoby, FGH 2B (1929) 1156-58. R. Laqueur, "Thallos," PWRE 2 Reihe A 9 (1934) cols. 1225-26; Denis, Introduction. 267-68; J. H. Charlesworth, The Pseudepigrapha and Modem Research (SCS 7; Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1976) 209-10; Holladay, Fragments, 1:343-69; Goodman, in Schurer, The History of the Jewish People, 3.1:543-45. 101. Africanus (in Syncellus) says that an eclipse which he mentions in his third book was the eclipse at the crucifixion of Christ. See Goodman, in Schiirer, The History of the Jewish People, 3.1:543. 102. See Denis, Introduction, 267-68. 103. Wacholder ("Thallus." EncJud 15, col. 1045) regards Thallus as a Gentile; Kippenberg (Garizim utid Synagoge, 84) regards him as a Hellenized Jew. 104. Josephus, A«/. 1.15 §§239-41; Evang. 9.20.2-4. See Walter, Fragmente . . . Historiker, 115-20; Hengel, "Anonymitat," 241-42; Holladay, Fragments, 1:245-59; R. Doran, "Cleodemus Malchus," in OTP 2:883-87; idem, "The Jewish Hellenistic Historians," 255-57; Goodman, in Schurer. The History of the Jewish People, 3.1:526-28; Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 151-53.

52


It is generally assumed that Cleodemus wrote in Libya about the second century B.C.E. He is probably dependent on the Septuagint and wrote early enough to be used by Polyhistor, but otherwise there is no specific indication of date. The fragment, despite its brevity, is of considerable interest. Not only does Cleodemus attempt to relate the history of Libya and its populace to Abraham. He also treats Heracles as an historical human being who can be integrated into the line of Abraham. This fits well with the euhemeristic tendencies of the other writers we have considered. Cleodemus refers briefly to Moses the lawgiver as his source. It is not likely, however, that he understood his identity in terms of the Mosaic law. While we cannot say anything with certainty on the basis of so brief a fragment, it would seem that descent from Abraham is more important to him than fidelity to the law.^**^ There is no reason to see his syncretism as peculiarly Samaritan, despite Eraser's argument that "Heracles, no doubt, is Melkart, to whom the Samaritans dedicated the temple of Zeus Xenios on Mt. Gerizim."***^ The identification with Melkart is not suggested in the surviving fragment. Kippenberg is probably right that he was a Hellenized Jew.

Pseudo-Hecataeus In view of the Palestinian provenance of Eupolemus, Wacholder has raised the possibility that much of the Jewish-Greek literature preserved by Alexander Polyhistor originated in Jerusalem and that it was primarily the work of priests. He claims that the tradition of such writing in Jerusalem can be traced back to "an eye-witness report intended for Ptolemy I, the founder of the Macedonian dynasty in Egypt," by a native priest who wanted to explain Judaism to the Greeks just as the Gentile priests Berossus and Manetho explained their cultures. This report was subsequently attributed to Hecataeus of A b d e r a . S i n c e the work of Pseudo-Hecataeus was not concerned with 105. The tendency to derive various peoples from Abraham was widespread. The most striking example was the Spartans in the forged letter of Areus to Onias (1 Mace. 12:19-23; Ant. 12,4.10 §§226-27). See B, Cardauns, "Juden und Spartaner, zur hellenistisch-jiidischen Literatur," Hermes 95 (1967) 317-24; Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism 2:62-63n.266. 106. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 2:963. 107. Kippenberg, Garizim und Synagoge, 84. 108. Wacholder, Eupolemus, 259-306, The passage is preserved in Ag. Ap. 1.183-205, 213-14, See M. Stern, Greek and Latin Autliors on Jews andJudaistn (3 vols.; Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1974-84) 1:35-44; Walter, Fragmente . . . Historiker, 144-60; Holladay, Fragments, 1:277-335; R. Doran, "Pseudo-Hecataeus," in OTP, 2:905-19; Goodman, in Schurer, The History of the Jewish People, 3.1:671-77; Attridge, "Historiography," Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 2Q2-y,B.B3i-Koc\vwix, Pseudo-Hecataeus "On the Jews": legitimizing the Jewish Diaspora (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996).


53

the ancient past but with the contemporary structure of Judaism and its regard for the laws, it will be discussed below in Part Two. Many scholars have argued that this work was actually written by Hecataeus, or that an authentic work of Hecataeus had undergone slight r e v i s i o n . C l a i m s of authenticity, however, have now been definitively refuted by Bezalel Bar-Kochva. Another work attributed to Hecataeus was definitely the work of a Jewish author. This was the book "On Abraham and the Egyptians," which is cited by Josephus and Clement. jt \^ not certain how far Josephus drew on this source, but it is likely that Abraham's discovery of God through nature and his instruction of the Egyptians in astronomy derives from PseudoHecataeus. The fragment in Clement cites verses on monotheism which are spuriously attributed to Sophocles and says they were transmitted in (Pseudo-) Hecataeus's book. Presumably Pseudo-Hecataeus claimed that the Greek poet had derived his idea of monotheism from Abraham. In all of this we recognize the familiar motifs of competitive historiography, designed to establish the antiquity and superiority of Jewish culture over against other traditions. Since the work was on Abraham and the Egyptians, it is reasonable to suppose that it was written in Egypt. The date cannot be specified except that it was prior to Josephus.''* In the case of other writers listed by Wacholder, such as Demetrius and Philo the epic poet, Palestinian provenance is a mere possibility, and there is no positive evidence of priestly authorship. In the single case of Theophilus, Palestinian provenance may be supported because of a close parallel to Eupolemus, but the single surviving fragment is insufficient to permit any definite conclusion. Josephus, writing at the end of the first century C.E., shows some acquaintance with the work of his predecessors, but he probably knew them only through the work of Alexander Polyhistor.'*^ He mentions Demetrius, Philo the Elder, and Eupolemus apparently on the assumption that all were pagan authors.**^ His work shares some of the tendencies we 109. For the literature see Bar-Kochva, Pseudo-Hecataeus, 1-6; M. Pucci Ben Zeev, "The Reliability of Josephus Flavius: The Case of Hecataeus' and Manetho's Accounts of Jews and Judaism -— Fifteen Years of Contemporary Research," JSJ 24 {1993) 215-34. 110. Josephus, Am. 1.7.2 §159; Clement, Stromateis, 5.113.1-2. 111. Walter (Fragmente, 151) rightly points out that we cannot assume that PseudoHecataeus composed the Pseudo-Sophocles verses or the other poetic forgeries which are transmitted with the fragments of Aristobulus (contrast Wacholder, Eupolemus, 264, who infers that Pseudo-Hecataeus must be prior to Aristobulus). 112. See above, n.84. Theophilus is preserved in Praep. Evang. 9.34. See Walter, Fragmente . . . Historiker, 109-11; Stem, Greek and Latin Authors, 1:126-27; Holladay, Fragments, 1:337-42; Doran, "The Jewish Hellenistic Historians," 254-55; Goodman, in Schurer, The History of the Jewish People, 3.1:556-57. Josephus mentions Theophilus in a list of Greek historians in Ag. Ap. 1.216. 113. See Sterhng, Historiography and Self-Definition, 263-84. 114. Ag.Ap. 1.218.

54


have seen in these authors, in augmenting the glory of the Jews, but he does not seem to be conseious of, or to have acknowledged, a tradition of Hellenistic Jewish historiography.

T h e Epic Poets

Philo Not all the attempts to glorify the tradition were in the form of prose history writing. At least one poet, Philo, was engaged in the same general enterprise as Artapanus and Eupolemus.**^ We have nothing to indicate his date except that he was earlier than Alexander Polyhistor. Philo's epic appears to have consisted chiefly of a recitation of the biblical history. His presentation of it as Peri Hierosolyma already indicates his affinity with the literature of the Hellenistic age, which had strong geographical interests and was often concerned with the foundation of cities. Hellenistic epics also show a predilection for obscure and recherche language."^ In Philo's case this tendency results in some scarcely inteUigible passages, since he did not in fact have a great command of the Greek language. The fi-agment on Joseph is said to be from the fourteenth book. Freudenthal may be right in emending this to the fourth; even so, the poem must have been lengthy, since it presumably continued down to the Israelite occupation of Jerusalem. 115. Sterling, Hisloriography, 284, notes that Josephus did not want to detract from the prestige of his own work 116. Praep. Evang. 9.20.1; 9.24.1; 9.37.1-3. See Wacholder, Eupolemus, 282-83; Y. Gutman, "Philo the Epic Poet," Scripla Hierosolymitana 1 (1954) 36-63; C. R. Holladay, Fragments from Hellenistic Jewish Authors. II. Poets (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989) 205-99; H. W. Attridge, "Philo the Epic Poet," in OTP 2:781-84; Goodman, in Schurer, The History of the Jewish People, 3.1:559-61; Walter, "Jiidisch-hellenistische Literatur," 109-10; idem, "Fragmente jUdisch-hellenistischer Epik: Philon, Theodotos," JSHRZ 4.3 (1983) 139-53; H. Lloyd-Jones and P. Parsons, Supplementum Hellenisticum (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1983) 32831; G. W. Nickelsburg, "The Bible Rewritten and Expanded," in Stone, ed., Jewish Writings, 89-156 (pp. 118-21 on Philo); Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 125-27. 117. Gutman ("Philo," 60-63) points especially to the analogy of the Messeniaka of Rhianus of Crete, who wrote in the second half of the third century B . C . E . Apollonius of Rhodes, author of the Argonautica, also composed a Ktiseis, a series of poems concerning foundation legends. Fraser {Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1:626) comments on the geographical interests of Apollonius as a typically Alexandrian feature. On the Hellenistic epic, see further Fraser, 1:624-49. 118. See Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1:633-38 on the scholarly language of Apollonius. The most obscure example of Hellenistic poetry was the Alexandra of Lycophron, which was deliberately difficult to decipher. Philo has often been compared to Lycophron, but Wacholder {Eupolemus, 283) is probably right that Philo wished to be understood, since the fragment on Joseph is quite clear.


55

The three fragments deal with Abraham, Joseph, and the water supply of Jerusalem. The last one is evidently a simple praise of the loveliness of the eity in summer when the streams are flowing. The theme is reminiscent of the biblical psalms: "there is a stream which gladdens the city of God."**^ Joseph is the lord of dreams who sat on the throne of Egypt. The final line is striking: dineusas lathraia chronou plemmyridi moires ("spinning secrets of time in a flood of fate"). The reference to moira, "fate," may be included only for its bombastic resonance, but it shows that Philo had no great aversion to heathen concepts. The most controversial fragment is that on Abraham. The passage is extremely obscure. Wacholder claims that "the first book depicted God's covenant with Abraham (circumcision),"'^" but there is no reference to circumcision here. The passage might be taken to suggest that the blessing of Abraham's descendants results from the sacrifice of Isaac, but the text is too cryptic to allow certainty. The most elaborate interpretation of the passage has been offered by Gutman, who argues that Philo's style finds its parallel in the Orphic hymns "in so far as there too the author's motive is apparent to shroud himself in a cloud of mystical o b s c u r i t i e s . " H e translates: A thousand times have 1 heard how once (the spirit of) Abraham abounded in primeval doctrines, the far-echoing lofty and radiant link of chains; how (his spirit) abounded with wisdom of great praise, the ecstasy beloved of God. For when he left the goodly abode of the blessed born, the great-voiced Blessed One prevented the immolation, and made immortal His word, from which day much-sung glory fell to the lot of the son of the blessed born.*^^ On the basis of this rendering he proceeds to expound Philo's intention: The Law of Israel is in his view one of the principal and basic elements in the cosmic process. This Law existed before the creation, but when the word came into existence the Law and its commandments served as that force of harmony which created order and rule, and fused the isolated parts of the cosmos into a process of unity, as they could not be fused without it. Men had no conception of the 119. Ps. 46:4. Note also Ps. 48:2, which claims that Zion is "the joy of all the earth," and cf. Philo's claim that it deiknysin hypertaui thambea ladn ("shows forth the greatest wonders of the peoples"). 120. Wacholder, Eupolemus, 283, 121. Gutman, "Philo," 37. 122. Ibid., 40. Gutman makes two emendations: epiemmyre for plemmyre and hamma ti for hammali. Then the two dative phrases, archegonotsi thesmois and megauchetoisi logismois, are in apposition and the two accusative phrases, hamma ti desmon and theiophile thelgetra, are also in apposition.

56


chains of this harmony in the cosmos — law and its regulations — till Abraham came and revealed them to humanity.'•^^ This interpretation depends heavily on three elements, all of them doubtful: First, it is said that Abraham "abounded in primeval doctrines" (archegonoisi thesmois). Gutman argues that this expression must refer to "codes or doctrines which preceded all things and anticipated all creation, even the creation of the world," and infers the Jewish idea of preexistent wisdom and the preexistent law.'^* However, it is not apparent that archegonoisi necessarily implies existence before creation. In accordance with Philo's generally bombastic style, it may simply connote extreme antiquity. Again, thesmois is not automatically to be identified as the law of Israel. The parallel with logismois suggests traditional wisdom. True, the Jewish law is identified with wisdom in other texts, but there is no clear reference to the Jewish law here, certainly not to the "book of the law of Moses."*^^ The point is simply that Abraham is informed by the most ancient wisdom.'^^ Second, hamma ti desmon is understood as "link of chains" in the light of Plato's use of desmos in the Timaeus, where the heavenly bodies are linked by desmois empsychois.^^^ Philo of Alexandria evidently drew on the Platonic tradition when he said that God was the desmos of the universe. However, the cosmic sense of desmos depends on its context. In itself the word simply means "bond." Since the immediate context here concerns the binding of Isaac, the desmoi in question may simply refer to that.'-^^ There is no explicit cosmic reference here. Third, Gutman translates theiophile thelgetra as "ecstasy beloved of God." However, thelgetra means "charm" or "spell," not an experience such as ecstasy, but something one does to stimulate the experience. If the desmon refers to the binding of Isaac, Philo is saying that the binding was an act 123. Ibid., 53. 124. Ibid., 40-41. Aristobulus, who may have been roughly contemporary with Philo, identifies Torah with Wisdom and says that it existed before heaven and earth {Praep. Evang. 13.12.11). The preexistence of wisdom is found in Prov. 8:22 and the identification with the Torah in Sin 24:23. 125. The phrase of Sir 24:23. 126. Holladay, following Mras, translates the first verse as 'They unloosed (eiclyon, taken as exelyon) the loins of our ancestors just as once (they were commanded) by the (divine) ordinances." This translation requires an emendation, reading fo merion ("thigh," loosely rendered as "loins") for to myrion (ten thousand times). Only by a long stretch of imagination can this translation yield a reference to Abraham's circumcision. The straightforward translation is provided by Attridge, "Philo the Epic Poet": "A thousand times have I heard in the ancient laws . . ." (taking eklyon as second aorist of klyo). 127. Gutman, "Philo," 44-45. Plato, Timaeus 38e. 128. Philo, Quis Rerum Divinarum Heres, 23. 129. So also Attridge, "Philo the Epic Poet." Holladay, Fragments, 2:251, gratuitously takes the bonds to signify the enduring bond of the covenant.


57

pleasing to God.*^'* The allusion to the binding as a charm or spell is a striking conception, but it does not support Gutman's interpretation. We may then propose an alternative translation for the first sentence: Ten thousand times have I heard in the ancient laws how once Abraham abounded in glorious reasonings, in respect of the famous, surpassing, splendid cord of bonds, spells pleasing to God. Admittedly the passage abounds in problems, but Gutman's interpretation strains probability. The Abraham fragment, like the others, should be read as a bombastic glorification of Jerusalem and Its history. Philo lacks the direct comparison with the heroes and traditions of other peoples which we find in Artapanus. The only indications of syncretism might be dismissed as loose use of terms such as thelgetra or moira. This language is not insignificant, however, as it reflects the author's desire to express his tradition in an idiom familiar to the Hellenistic world. The adaptation of terms which were laden with significance in Hellenistic religion is essentially syncretistic, as it results in a mixture of the ideas of both traditions. The Torah is here construed as primeval thesmoi, not as unique revelation. The possibility that truth and wisdom can be gained through other traditions too is fundamental to the entire apologetic of Hellenistic Judaism. Whether we regard that apologetic as an outward-directed attempt to persuade the Gentiles or an inward-directed attempt to boost self-respect, the underlying assumption is that there are universal norms by which the different traditions can be compared. The desire to find a common cross-cultural basis underlies the experimentation with Greek literary forms such as the epic. This kind of cosmopolitan Judaism may have been fostered in Judea as well as Alexandria, but the similarities between Philo's work and other Hellenistic epics favors Alexandrian authorship.*^*

Theodotus The only other biblically inspired epic which has survived is that of Theodotus. *^2 Since it is usually linked with that of Philo, we may discuss it here 130. Compare the cords which Job gives to his daughters in the Testament of Job 46-47. Holladay again finds a reference to circumcision here, but the reference is clearly to the binding of Isaac. 131. Wacholder {Eupolemus. 282), following Karpeles, claims that Philo was a native of Jerusalem. The only element in the fragments which would tie him to the city is the reference to swimming in Praep. Evang. 9.37.1, but the passage is too obscure to bear any weight. \32. Praep. Evang. 9.22.1-11. Wacholder {Eupolemus, 283-85) sees Theodotus as a Samaritan counterpart of Philo the epic poet. See also A. Ludwich, De Theodoti carmine graecojudaico (Konigsberg University, 1899); Gutman, Beginnings. 1:245-61. See now Holladay, Fragments, 2:51-204; F. Fallon, "Theodotus," in OTP, 2:785-93; Lloyd-Jones and Parsons,

58


for convenience, but in fact it is animated by a very different spirit. The title of the work is given in Eusebius as Peri loudaidn, but most scholars have assumed that it was in fact a poem on Shechem, which would only have been written by a Samaritan, and that the title merely reflects Polyhistor's inability to distinguish between Hebrews (which would include Samaritans) and Jews.'^^ The scholarly consensus, however, is not well founded.*^'* The fact that the single surviving fragment concerns Shechem does not prove that the whole poem was on that subject. Apart from the opening verses, which praise the beauty of Shechem and refer to it as a sacred town, hieron asty, the content weighs heavily against the theory of Samaritan authorship. We are told that God prompted Simeon and Levi to destroy Shechem because the people in Shechem were impious, dia to tous en Sikimois asebeis einai:^^^ "God smote the inhabitants of Shechem, for they did not honor whoever came to them, whether evil or noble. Nor did they determine rights or laws throughout the city. Rather, deadly works were their care."'^^ Even though the Samaritans claimed descent from the sons of Jacob rather than from Emmor, it is surely unlikely that a Samaritan author would choose to depict "the inhabitants of Shechem" in such a negative light. By contrast, the passage would make excellent sense as a Jewish work from the time of John Hyrcanus. The poem has a strongly legalistic bent, insisting on the prohibition of intermarriage with Gentiles and the necessity of circumcision. Circumcision is especially emphasized "for God himself said it." A paraphrasing statement in Supplementum Hellenisticum, 360-65; Nickelsburg, "The Bible Rewritten and Expanded," 121-25; Goodman, in Schurer, The Histoiy of the Jewish People, 3.1:561-62; WaUer in JSHRZ 4.3:154-71; Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 120-25. 133. So Freudenthal, Hellenistische Studien, 99-100. Also Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 2:986; Hengel, "Anonymitat," 242-43; Wacholder, Eupolemus, 285; Denis, Introduction, 272. 134. Kippenberg, Garizim und Synagoge, 84; Charlesworth, The Pseudepigrapha, 210; Fallon, "Theodotus," 787; Goodman, in Schurer, The Histoiy of the Jewish People, 3.1:562. For full discussion, see J. J. Collins, "The Epic of Theodotus and the Hellenism of the Hasmoneans," HTR 73 (1980) 91-104. 135. This phrase is the paraphrase of Polyhistor, not a direct quotation from Theodotus. 136. Trans. Fallon. The first line reads Blapte theos Sikimdn oiketoras. Holladay, Fragments. 2:123, renders "God disabled the inhabitants of Shechem," on the grounds that this is the more proper Homeric sense, but if this passage comes towards the end of the work, as the order of the quotations in Eusebius implies, it is more likely to refer to the destruction of the Shechemites. R. Pummer, "Genesis 34 in Jewish Writings of the Hellenistic and Roman Periods," HTR 75 (1982) 177-88, correctly argues that blapie should be read here as an epic imperfect rather than as an imperative (p. 183). 137. Pummer, "Genesis 34," argues that the account is not necessarily anti-Samaritan, but is a retelling of the biblical account, intended to portray the patriarchs in a positive light. So also Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 124; A. Standhartinger, " 'Um zu Sehcn die Tbchter des Landes': Die Perspektive Dinas in der jiidisch-Hellenistischen Diskussion um Gen 34," in L, Bormann, K. Del Tredici, and A. Standhartinger, eds.. Religious Propaganda and Missionary Competition in Che New Testament World (Leiden; Brill, 1994) 89-116 (seep. 92). Nonetheless, the account fits very well in a Hasmonean selling.


59

Praep. Evang. 9.22.5 says that Jacob required the inhabitants of Shechem to be circumcised and convert to Judaism, peritemnomenous ioudaisai. While the terminology here is Polyhistor's rather than Theodotus's, circumcision was widely associated with conversion to Judaism in the Hasmonean period. By contrast, the Samaritans allegedly had gone along with the policies of Antiochus Epiphanes, even renaming their temple and referring to themselves as "Sidonians."*^^ This episode undoubtedly contributed to the tensions between Jews and Samaritans which came to a climax in the reign of John Hyrcanus. After the death of Antiochus VII Sidetes in 129 B.C.E., John Hyrcanus began a campaign against the neighbors of the Jews. He compelled the Idumeans to be circumcised and accept the laws of the Jews. He ravaged Shechem, destroyed the temple of Mt. Gerizim, and later, about 107 B.C.E., besieged and destroyed Samaria. The poem of Theodotus could easily be read as a paradigmatic justification for the actions and policies of Hyrcanus. The laudatory description of the appearance of Shechem may be only the conventional style of the epic. The accuracy of the description is not surprising in a Jewish a u t h o r . x h e statement that Shechem is a hieron asty is not surprising, since Shechem was a traditional holy site in biblical history. In contrast to "Pseudo-Eupolemus," Theodotus conspicuously does not refer to a holy mountain at Gerizim. The problem with Shechem was not with the site but with the inhabitants. Despite his use of the epic form, and a Greek style far superior to that of Philo the epic poet, Theodotus lacks the universalism which characterizes most Hellenistic Jewish writers. His vision of Judaism is covenantal nomism of the narrowest variety. The children of Abraham are defined by circumcision and marriage within their own race. There is no attempt at correlation 138. Josephus, A H / . 12.5.5 §§257-64. Cf. 2Macc. 6:1-6. Josephus preserves a letter from the "Sidonians of Shechem" to Antiochus Epiphanes. The authenticity of the letter has been defended by Bickerman {"Un document relatif a la persecution d'Antiochus IV," in Studies in Jewish and Christian Histoiy. 2:105-35, first published in RHR 115 [1937] 118-223). See also Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, 1:293-94. For different opinions, see M. Delcor ("Vom Sichem der hellenistischen Epoche zum Sychar des Neuen Testaments," ZDPV 18 [1962] 3448), who argues that the letter came from a colony of actual Sidonians; and R, J. Coggins (Samaritans and Jews [Oxford: Blackwell, 1975] 99), who dismisses the title as a slighting reference by a Jewish author. On the name of the Samaritan temple, see Kippenberg, Garizim und Synagoge. 74-80. 139. Ant. 13.254-58; 275-81; J.W. i.62-65; Purvis, Tlie Samaritan Pentateuch. 113; Kippenberg, Garizim und Synagoge, 85-92. 140. On the accuracy of Theodotus's description of Shechem as shown by modern excavations, see R. J. Bull, "A Note on Theodotus' Description of Shechem," HTR 60 (1967) 22128. Bull argues that Theodotus must have written before the mid-,second century B . C . E . because he refers to the wall of Shechem as a lofty defense enclosure (aipytlien lierlcos). Archeological evidence shows that the wall had fallen into neglect in the second half of the first century. It is sufficient, however, that Theodotus remembered the wall as a substantial defense.

60


with universal history. The one apparent piece of syncretism, in Praep. Evang. 9.22.1, which states that Sikimos was son of Hermes, is controversial. It is often regarded as a blunder by Polyhistor, since the father's name is otherwise given consistently as Emmor. It is possible, however, that Theodotus distinguished between Sikimos the founder, in the ancient past, and the son of Hamor, who is a central figure in the same fragment.'*' The work is a striking instance of the fusion of a Greek form with an exclusive view of the Hebraic tradition. The epic form here could scarcely be intended to appeal to Gentiles. It presupposes a degree of Hellenization in its audience, despite the insistence on Jewish distinctiveness. Of course, the epic form lent itself admirably to nationalistic propaganda, but it is striking that Jewish nationalism is comfortably clad in such an obviously Hellenistic dress. If this poem was written in support of John Hyrcanus, it offers a remarkable illustration of the Hasmonean blend of nationalism and Hellenization. It supports the contention of Tcherikover that the Judaizing policies of the Hasmoneans were not religious in intent but political and that their struggle with the Greek towns "was not for or against culture, but the rivalry between two political powers."'*^

Jewish Historiography in the First Century C.E. Our review of the propagandistic use of ancient history in Hellenistic Judaism would be incomplete without some reference to the two Palestinian historians from the late first century C.E., Justus of Tiberias and Josephus. The work of Justus is lost except for three fragments. Its nature is described by Photius, the ninth-century patriarch of Constantinople: I have read the Chronicle of Justus of Tiberias, which is entitled The Jewish Kings Arranged in Genealogical Tables. He was a native of Tiberias in the Galilee. Beginning his history with Moses, he concluded it with the death of Agrippa, the seventh of the Herodian dynasty, the last king of the Jews.^'^' One of the surviving fragments tells an unhistorical anecdote about Plato at the trial of Socrates. The other two synchronize the date of the Exodus with those of Attic and Egyptian kings. It would seem that much of Justus's work was devoted to chronography. He is thought to have influenced Africanus and through him Christian chronography, but he is known chiefly through the polemical 141. See Holladay, Fragments, 2:131-35. 142. Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization, 248. 143. Photius, Bibliotheca, 31; FGH, III C, 695-99. See Wacholder, Eupolemus, 298-306.


61

references of Josephus in his Vita. The remains of Justus's work are too scanty to give any clear impression of its character, but he evidently stood in the tradition of the Hellenistic Jewish historians in his endeavor to correlate Jewish and universal history, whether he actually knew that tradition or not. Josephus, by contrast, stands with Philo as one of the two Hellenistic Jewish writers whose work has survived in substantial quantity. Unlike the earlier Jewish historians, Josephus wrote with an explicitly apologetic purpose.'''^ His Antiquities were designed, in his own words, to demonstrate "the extreme antiquity of our Jewish race, the purity of the original stock, and the manner in which it established itself in the country which we occupy today" {Ag. Ap. 1.1). While he usually stays close to the biblical text, he includes some of the characteristic motifs of Hellenistic Jewish propaganda. The account of Abraham borrows from Pseudo-Hecataeus the motifs of instructing the Egyptians and of philosophical speculation {Ant. 1.7.1-8.2 §§154-68). The account of Moses includes a legendary campaign against Ethiopia, a variant of the tradition found in Artapanus {Ant 2.10.1-2 §§23853).**^ More significantly, the whole genre of the Antiquities conforms to the model of patriotic and apologetic history provided by Dionysius of Halicarnassus, as has been demonstrated by H. W. Attridge.''^^ So, while the instances of direct dependence on the Jewish historiographical tradition are limited, the whole work is informed by a basic principle of that tradition — the assimilation to Hellenistic models, and the competitive desire to establish the antiquity and significance of Jewish culture.'*^ Josephus only rarely mentions his predecessors, and then he seems to think that many of them were Gentiles.''*^ He throws invaluable light on their 144. Esp. Vita 336-67 (§65). 145. See H. R. Moehring, "The Acta Pro Judaeis in the Antiquities of Flavius Josephus," in Neusner, ed., Clirisliaiiily, Judaism and Other Greco-Roman Culls. 124-58. 146. Whether Josephus depended directly on Artapanus, or drew on a variant tradition, is disputed. He omits some key points in Artapanus's account, such as the founding of Hermopolis and the introduction of circumcision, and has an entirely different explanation of the origin of the campaign. See T. Rajak, "Moses in Ethiopia: Legend and Literature," JJS 29 (1978) 111-22; A. Shinan, "Moses and the Ethiopian Woman," Scripia Hierosolymitana 27 (1978) 66-78; Sterling, Historiography and Self-Defmition. 268-80, 147. H. W. Attridge, The Interpretation of Biblical Histoiy in the Antiquitates Judaicae of Flavius Josephus (HDR 7; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1976) 29-70; idem, "Josephus and His Works," in Stone, ed., Jewish Writings, 185-232; Sterling, Historiography and SelfDefmition. 284-97. 148. See further L. H. Feldman, "Abraham the Greek Philosopher in Josephus," TAPA 99 (1968) 143-56; idem, "Hellenizations in Josephus' Portrayal of Man's Decline," in Religions in Antiquity: Festschrift E. R. Goodenough (ed. J. Neusner; Leiden: Brill, 1968) 333-53; idem, "Hellenizations in Josephus' Version of Esther (Ant. Jud, 11.185-295)." TAPA 101 (1970) 143-70; Attridge {The Interpretation, 17-27) reviews scholarship on Hellenization in Josephus. See also Droge, Homer or Moses? 35-48, 149. Attridge, The Interpretation, 33-35. See Ag. Ap. 1.216-18 (§23), which refers fo Theophilus, Theodotus, Demetrius (of Phalerum!), Philo the Elder, and Eupolemus.

62


work, however, by his review of the Graeco-Egyptian polemical literature to which they often implicitly responded. The tract Against Apion, by its explicit apologetic, throws much light on the issues in the conflicting propaganda between Jews and Gentiles,*^" but we should remember that the intensity of the anti-Jewish propaganda only developed in the period after Alexander Polyhistor. Despite the hostility of Josephus toward the GraecoEgyptian writings, he still appears eager to impress the Greeks and Romans by the antiquity and the philosophy of the Jews. The apologetic of Josephus was far more complex than that of the earlier Jewish historians. It included a significant philosophical component,'^' and attached great importance to the Jewish law, which he compares with the Laws of Plato in Ag. Ap. 2.255-58 (36). (Josephus claims that Plato followed the example of Moses.) He was even capable of allegorical exegesis on occas i o n . I n all of this he had other precedents In Hellenistic Jewish literature, as we shall see. What is noteworthy is the fusion of competitive historiography with a philosophical approach to the law. Yet the "moral lesson" with which he begins his Antiquities is the doctrine of retribution in history, which is squarely in the tradition of the Deuteronomic historians of the Hebrew Bible: "men who conform to the will of God, and do not venture to transgress laws that have been excellently laid down, prosper in all things beyond belief, and for their reward are offered by God felicity; whereas in proportion as they depart from the strict observance of these laws . . . whatever good thing they strive to do ends in irretrievable disasters" (Ant. Proem. 3 §14). Detailed analysis of Josephus does not fall within the scope of this study. It is noteworthy, however, that the last and greatest Hellenistic Jewish historian was a Judean. The distinction between Judea and the Diaspora has perhaps its least value in the tradition of nationalistic historiography.

Conclusion In this chapter we have been concerned with the propagandistic rewriting of history which is characteristic of the earliest Hellenistic Jewish literature. In a few cases, such as those of Demetrius and Aristeas, the use of history re150. See now L. H. Feldman and J. Levison, ed., Joseplius'Contra Apionem: Studies in Its Character and Context with a Latin Concordance to the Portion Missing in Greek (Leiden: Brill, 1996). 151. See Attridge's discussion of the idea of Providence and the moralizing character of the Antiquities (The Interpretation, 71-144). Note also Josephus's own claim in Ant. 1.1.4 §18 that much of his work is devoted to natural philosophy. 152. Cf. Ant. Proem 4 §24, where Josephus acknowledges that some things are written in solemn allegory, but defers philosophical analysis for the present.


63

fleets a Deuteronomic theology, by showing how Moses' wife was not really an alien or how Job was rewarded for his p a t i e n c e . T h i s theology is also reflected in the exegetical concern to resolve apparent problems in the biblical text. In the greater number of these writers, however, the dominant focus is not on the law but on the glory of the Jewish people. Jewish identity is viewed in terms of ethnic and national solidarity. To be Jewish is to belong to the same people as Abraham and Moses and the other heroes of the past. The exploits of these heroes show the preeminence of the Jews by outshining the heroes of the other peoples. At the same time, the criteria for excellence are those commonly accepted in the Hellenistic world. The distinctively Jewish virtues of the Torah are thrust into the background. In this way, the dissonance between Jewish tradition and Hellenistic environment is decreased. Jews and Gentiles have common values, and so far from being witless barbarians, the Jewish people have produced the greatest cultural heroes of all. We can see from the epic of Theodotus that insistence on detailed observance of the law was compatible with the glorification of Jewish tradition in Hellenistic categories. In fact, however, the law is seldom emphasized in this literature. Josephus is exceptional among the historical writers for his explicit interest in the law. This fact is remarkable in view of the attention paid to the lawgiver by Gentile authors beginning with Hecataeus of Abdera.'^* We will find in Part Two of this study that extensive use was made of the law for apologetic purposes. For the present, we must emphasize that a significant segment of Hellenistic Judaism did not think primarily in terms of the law or ethical practices, but found its identity in the often fantastic stories of ancestral heroes who outshone the best of the Greeks, Babylonians, and Egyptians.

153. We may note in passing that the presentation of the history of the second century in 2 Maccabees also has a strongly Deuteronomic flavor, despite its Hellenistic form. We shall return to 2 Maccabees in Chapter 2 below. 154. See J. 0 . Gager, Moses in Greco-Roman Paganism (SBLMS 16; Nashville: Abingdon, 1972) 25-112. B.C.E.

CHAPTER 2

Religion and Politics; The Ptolemaic Era

The History of the J e w s in Ptolemaic E g y p t The history of Jews (or their Israelite forebears) in Egypt can be traced back to the beginnings of Israel as a people. Reports in the book of Genesis that the patriarchs went down to Egypt in time of famine could reflect historical reality at any time in the second or early first millennium. The sale of Joseph as a slave could appear plausible at any point in antiquity. We also read of Egypt as a place of refuge for political dissidents (Jeroboam in 1 Kings 11) and for endangered prophets (Uriah in Jer. 26:20-23). After the fall of Jerusalem in 586 B.C.E., one Johanan son of Kareah took the remnants of the royal house and also Jeremiah and Baruch and fled to Egypt. Thereafter we hear of "Judeans living in the land of Egypt, at Migdol, at Tahpanhes, at Memphis, and in the land of Pathros" (Jer. 44:1). We also know of a colony of Jewish mercenaries at Elephantine, who had gone to Egypt before the Persian era and survived until the end of the fifth century.^ The coming of Alexander the Great, however, ushered in a new era and heralded a period of unprecedented growth for the Jews in Egypt. We have three distinct accounts of the beginnings of the Jewish community in Egypt during the Hellenistic age. First, Josephus claims that a district by the sea in Alexandria was pre-

1. J. M. Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt: From Rameses II to Emperor Hadrian (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995) 21-44.

64

RELIGION AND POLITICS: THE PTOLEMAIC ERA

65

sented to the Jews as their residence by Alexander.'^ This claim, however, is unsupported.^ Second, Josephus also quotes from a book which he attributed to Hecataeus of Abdera. According to this source, when Ptolemy I became master of Syria after the battle of Gaza (312 B.C.E.) many of the men, hearing of his kindness and humanity, wished to accompany him to Egypt and take part in the affairs [of the kingdom]. "One of them (he [Hecataeus] says) was Hezekiah, high priest of the Jews, a man at the age of around sixty-six, highly thought of by his compatriots, and not unintelligent in his mind, and moreover, an able speaker and . . . experienced, if indeed anyone was, in the affairs." . . . "This man," he says, "having obtained this authority and being well acquainted with us, assembled some of his men and read to them [a statement describing] the whole advantage [of emigration to Egypt]. For he possessed in writing tthe conditions of] their settUng and constitution." (Ag. Ap. 1.186-89)'* The authenticity of this passage has been decisively discredited by Bezalel Bar-Kochva.^ Ptolemy I is known to have treated the people of the conquered area harshly. Even Josephus elsewhere says that "Syria at the hands of Ptolemy son of Lagus, then called Soter (Savior), suffered the opposite of [what is indicated by] his surname."^ Josephus cites Agatharcides of Cnidus as saying that Ptolemy entered Jerusalem unopposed on the Sabbath, and concluding that they were "delivered into the hands of a harsh master," and that the folly of their Sabbath observance was exposed.'' The voluntary migration of a high priest would be surprising, but in any case no high priest named Hezekiah is otherwise known. There are coins from the end of the Persian period with the legend "Hezekiah the governor," and others that are slightly later 2. Ag. Ap. 2.35. In J.W. 2.487 he says that Alexander gave them permission to reside in the city "on terms of equality v/ith the Greeks," but that their special quarter was given to them by the Diadochi. Cf. Ant. 12.1.1 §8, where he says that they were given equal privileges (isopoliteia) by Ptolemy I Soter. 3. Nonetheless A. Kasher, The Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt (Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1985) 2, finds it "quite credible," 4. Translation (with adaptations) from B. Bar-Kochva, Pseudo-Hecataeus 'On the Jews': Legitimizing the Jewish Diaspora (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996) 47, 49. 5. Bar-Kochva, Pseudo-Hecataeus, 71-91. For the debate on this issue, see M. Pucci Ben Zeev, "The Reliability of Josephus Flavius: The Case of Hecataeus' and Manetho's Accounts of Jews and Judaism: Fifteen Years of Contemporary Research (1974-1990)," JSJ 24 (1993) 215-34. 6. Josephus, Ant. 12,1.1 §3. Cf. Diodorus 19.17.4-6. See Bar-Kochva, PseudoHecataeus, 72-73. 7. Ag. Ap. 1.205-11. Cf. Ant. 12.1.1 §§4-7. The capture of Jerusalem probably dates to 302/1 B . C . E . , See Bar-Kochva, Pseudo-Hecataeus, 77.

66


with the name "Hezekiah."^ It is quite possible that this Hezekiah migrated to Egypt, whether voluntarily or not, and was a leader of the Jewish community, but the reliability of Pseudo-Hecataeus's account is rendered dubious.^ The third account of the origin of the Jewish community in Ptolemaic Egypt is found in the Letter of Aristeas. Here we are told that Ptolemy I had deported 100.000 people from Judea to Egypt. He armed 30,000 of these and placed them in forts around the land, and sold the others into slavery {Letter of Aristeas 12-14). The numbers in this account are surely inflated, but it is quite plausible that a significant number of Jews were brought to Egypt by compulsion.^" It is also likely, however, that many more came voluntarily, both under Ptolemy I and under his successors. Since Judea was under Ptolemaic rule throughout the third century B.C.E., there was no impediment to such immigration. Our knowledge of the Jews in Egypt in the third century B.C.E. is derived from papyri and inscriptions.^^ While this evidence is often elliptic, it provides some fascinating glimpses of the developing Diaspora. Many Jews found a path to advancement in the army and became "cleruchs," soldiers to whom the king granted plots of land as a reward for their service. We find these cleruchs in various parts of Egypt, especially in the Faiyum, around Krokodilopolis. There were Jewish policemen. A chief of police named Ptolemy dedicated a synagogue with "the Jews in Athribis" in the mid-second century B.C.E.^^ There were Jewish peasants, tenant farmers, and simple craftsmen. Jews engaged in tax collecting and occupied various administrative p o s i t i o n s . T h e opening 8. Bar-Kochva, P.seudo-Hecataeus. 255-70. 9. The account attributed to Hecataeus is often accepted as reliable; see, e.g., Kasher, The Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt, 2-3; H. Hegermann, "The Diaspora in the Hellenistic Age," in W, D. Davies and L. Finkelstein, eds.. The Cambridge History of Judaism. Volume 2: The Hellenistic Age (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989) 131-33. 10. Bar-Kochva, Pseudo-Hecataeus, 76; "one cannot imagine that an autho^who so admired the Ptolemaic dynasty and strove to prove its favorable attitude toward the Jews would have included in his book a story about their deportation and enslavement unless the event was indeed deeply rooted in the memory of his contemporaries." 11. V. Tcherikover and A. Fuks, eds.. Corpus Papyrorum Iudaicarum (3 vols.; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1957-64), hereafter CPJ. See also P, M. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria (Oxford: Clarendon, 1972) 1:54-58; A. Kasher, The Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt, 1 -74; F. Millar, in E. Schurer, The Histoiy of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 B.C.-A-D. 135) (rev. and ed. G. Vermes, F. Millar, and M. Goodman; 3 vols.; Edinburgh: Clark, 1973-87) 3,1:38-53; Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 73-98; J. M. O. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora from Alexander to Trajan (323 BCE-UJCE) (Edinburgh: Clark, 1996) 19-47. For the inscriptions, see W, Horbury and D, Noy, Jewish Inscriptions of Graeco-Roman Egypt (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992). 12. Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 83-87; Kasher, The Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt, 48-55; Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 23. 13. Horbury and Noy, Jewish Inscriptions, 45 (no, 27), 14. Kasher, The Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt, 63-74. 15. Ibid., 58-63.


67

chapter of 3 Maccabees tells how one Dositheos son of Drimylos, who was "bom a Jew, but who had renounced his ancestral faith," foiled a plot to murder Ptolemy IV Philopator before the battle of Raphia in 217 B.C.E. The story is legendary, but the existence of Dositheos is confirmed by the papyri. He is mentioned in the Zeno papyri as record keeper and secretary to the king.^'' He eventually rose to become an eponymous priest of the cult of Alexander and the deified Ptolemies under Ptolemy III Euergetes I in 223/222 B.C.E. This was one of the highest honors that could be obtained in the service of the Ptolemies. (The first such eponymous priest was the brother of Ptolemy I.) Such a position was not open to native Egyptians, but it was open to any Hellene. The Jews, as Greek-speaking non-Egyptians, ranked as Hellenes. Practically all occupations and walks of life were open to them, although some, hke the pagan priesthood of Dositheus, might be problematic from the viewpoint of traditional Judaism. Egyptian Jews in the third century B.C.E. often took Greek names. There was a revival of traditional Jewish names in the second century, beginning even before the Maccabean revolt.^^ The early embrace of Greek culture, reflected in the choice of names, did not, however, imply a loss of Jewish identity. Inscriptions record the dedication of synagogues from the middle of the third century B.C.E. These synagogues are said to be dedicated "on behalf of King Ptolemy (III Euergetes) and Queen Berenike."^" Later inscriptions, from the second century B.C.E., record not only the name of the Ptolemy, but also the name of the donor. Some donors bore Greek names (Ptolemaios, Hermias).^^ A Jew could bear a Greek name and be a loyal subject of the Ptolemy and simultaneously support his local synagogue. Little light is shed on this early period from literary sources. 3 Maccabees gives an account of a persecution of Jews by Ptolemy IV Philopator, which involved an attempt to have the Jews branded with the emblem of Dionysus (3 Mace. 2:29-30). Philopator was, in fact, devoted to Dionysus and may have made some attempt to assimilate the Jewish religion to 16. Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 56-61. 17. CPJ, 1:127A, dated to 240 B . C . E . The Zeno papyri are the papers of a Greek from Asia Minor who managed the estate of a royal minister named Apollonius. Part of the archive concerns Palestine. See V. Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization and the Jews (New York: Atheneum, 1970) 60-72. 18. Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 81. 19. S. Honigman, "The Birth of a Diaspora: The Emergence of a Jewish Self-Defmition in Ptolemaic Egypt in the Light of Onomastics," in S. J. D. Cohen and E. Frerichs, eds., Diasporas in Antiquity (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993) 93-127. Honigman credits the resurgence of Jewish names in some part to the use of the Septuagint. 20. Horbury and Noy, Jewish Inscriptions, 35 (no. 22); 201 (no. 117); Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 88. 21. Horbury and Noy, Jewish Inscriptions, 45 (no. 27); 48 (no. 28); Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 94.

68


the Dionysiac cult.^^ 3 Maccabees, however, is a highly fantastic composition and cannot be regarded as an accurate historical a c c o u n t . I t eontains some reminiscences of the third century, in the mention of Dositheus son of Drimylus and the Dionysiac cult, but the story as we have it is surely later and most probably dates from the Roman period.^* Of the Jewish writings which can with any plausibility be dated prior to Philometor, only Artapanus reflects a distinct political attitude. There Moses is depicted as a benefactor of the Egyptian people and is regarded by the priests as worthy of honor like a god. The king, however, is jealous of Moses and plots against him. The arrogance of the king further leads him to maltreat the Jews and so is responsible for the plagues which Moses brings upon the Egyptians, and for the destruction of the Egyptians at the Exodus. What is remarkable In all this is the degree to which the Egyptian people is exculpated and blame concentrated on the king. The political message of Artapanus to his own time would seem to be one of solidarity with the Egyptians and suspicion of the (Greek) king. Some later documents, such as 3 Maccabees, also depict the king as villain but suggest solidarity with the Greeks, not with the native E g y p t i a n s . I n fact, most Jewish Hellenistic literature is very hostile towards the native Egyptians. Artapanus may have been exceptional, even in his own day. Since his political attitudes are only implicit, no great weight can be placed on them. Throughout the third century, Judea was under Ptolemaic control, but it was conquered by Antiochus III of Syria in 198 B.C.E. Jewish relations with the Seleucids soon deteriorated, however, and the Maccabean revolt initiated a period of independence in the Jewish homeland. The most important effect of the upheavals of these years on the Egyptian Diaspora was that they led to a new wave of immigration. Most notable of the new refugees was Onias IV, the legitimate successor to the high p r i e s t h o o d . p t o l emy VI Philometor, for his own obvious reasons, befriended the Jewish exiles and allowed Onias to build a Jewish temple at Leontopolis. The reign of Philometor was arguably the high point of Jewish influence in Egypt. 22. On Philopator's interest in Dionysus, see Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1:202. Cf. 2 Mace. 6:7-8, which says that Jews were compelled to participate in the cult of Dionysus by Antiochus Epiphanes. Plutarch (Quaestiones Convivales, 4.6 [671-72]) says that the feast of Tabernacles resembles the cult of Dionysus. Cf. Chapter 1 above on a possible reference to an incident involving the Dionysiac cult in Artapanus. 23. Kasher, The Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt, 211-32, is exceptional in arguing for its reliability. 24. 3 Maccabees will be discussed at length in Chapter 3 below. 25. E.g., 3 Mace. 3:8-10 stresses that the Greeks of Alexandria were sympathetic to the Jews. 26. Ant. 12.9.7 §387. Cf Jerome, Commentary on Daniel, 3.11.14, which says that he took very many Jews with him, and that on the occasion of the death of Onias III vast numbers of Jews (infinita examina) fled to Egypt.


69

Josephus claims that the Ptolemy entrusted his whole army to Onias and Dositheus {Ag. Ap. 2.49). While this is undoubtedly an exaggeration, it is apparent that the cleruchy at Leontopolis held a strategic position and wielded considerable influence. In the same period, the Jewish philosopher Aristobulus dedicated a book to Philometor and is called the teacher of King Ptolemy in a letter prefixed to 2 Maccabees (2 Mace. 1:10). Philometor is also said to have ruled in favor of the Alexandrian Jews in a dispute with the Samaritans {Ant 13.3.4 §§74-79).

Onias and Leontopolis There is no doubt that a Jewish temple was built in Egypt, at Leontopolis in the Heliopolitan nome, by a priest named Onias. Virtually all the details of the story, however, are unclear.^'' In the Jewish War, Josephus says that it was Onias "son of Simon" — that is, Onias III — who fled to Egypt when the Jerusalem temple was profaned by Antiochus E p i p h a n e s . I n the Antiquities, however, he says that it was the son of that Onias, namely, Onias IV, and that he fled when Alcimus was appointed high priest in 162 B . C . E . S i n c e 2 Mace. 4:33-34 explicitly says that Onias III was murdered, after seeking asylum in a temple at Daphne near Antioch, and there are apparent allusions to his death in near contemporary sources (Dan. 9:26; 11:22; 7 Enoch 90:8), most scholars have assumed that it was the younger Onias who fled to Egypt.30

In the Antiquities, Josephus presents an alleged exchange of letters between Onias and Ptolemy Philometor about the proposed temple, in which Onias is said to have been inspired by Isa. 19:19, which prophesied that there would be an altar to the Lord in the land of Egypt.^^ It would be in the like27. For recent reviews of tiie evidence, see R. Hayward, "Tiie Jewisli Temple at Leontopolis: A Reconsideration," JJS 33 (1982) 429-43; F Parente, "Onias III and the Founding of the Temple of Leontopolis," in F. Parente and J. Sievers, eds., Josephus and the History of tlie Greco-Roman Period: Essays in Memory of Morton Smith (Leiden: Brill, 1994) 69-98; G. Bohak, Joseph and Aseneth and the Jewish Temple in Heliopolis (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1996) 19-40; E. Gruen, "The Origins and Objectives of Onias' Temple," Scripta Classica Israelica 16(1997) 47-70; J. E. Taylor, "A Second Temple in Egypt: The Evidence for the Zadokite Temple of Onias," JSJ 29 (1998) 297-321. 28. J.W. 1.31-33; 7.420-36. 29. Ant. 12.9.7 §§387-88; 13.3.1 §62. 30. Bohak, Joseph and Aseneth. 20; Gruen, "The Origins and Objectives," 49-51. Some scholars, however, still argue for Onias III: Parente, "Onias HI"; V, Keil, "Onias III — Martyrer Oder Tempelgrunder," ZAW 97 (1985) 221-33; Taylor, "A Second Temple." 308. 31. The original Hebrew text, preserved in IQIsa, mentions the "city of the sun," Heliopolis ("fr haheres). Later manuscripts read "city of destruction" (tr haheres) or "city of anathema" (tr haherem). The change was presumably deliberate. The LXX reads polls asedek

70


ness of the temple in Jerusalem and of the same dimensions, but in fact the temple built was smaller and p o o r e r . B u t Josephus's account is riddled with contradictions and implausibilities. Philometor and his queen appear to be more concerned about the appropriateness of the site than was Onias. It is difficult to derive any reliable information from this account.^^ Onias is said to have supported his request by reminding the Ptolemy of the services he had rendered in the course of a war, when he was in Coele-Syria and Phoenicia. This cannot refer to the time before he fled to Egypt, as he was then too young, and there was no occasion for services in that region thereafter. Nonetheless, it is plausible that the grant of land, which became known as "the land of Onias," was made as a reward for military service, even if Josephus is muddled as to when and where the service was rendered. In Against Apion (2.50-52) Josephus reports that after Philometor's death Onias took up arms against Philometor's brother, Ptolemy Physcon, on behalf of his widow, Cleopatra, and he cites Apion as saying that Onias had marched on Alexandria at the head of a large army. Josephus claims that it was the Jewish general who negotiated the truce. Later he refers to two other Jewish generals, Chelkias and Ananias, who supported Cleopatra III in her conflict with her son Ptolemy Lathyrus, towards the end of the second century B.C.E.^"^ These are said to be "sons of the Onias who had built the temple in the nome of Heliopolis." Later again we are told that the Jews of the land of Onias blocked Mithridates and Anlipater when they were going to relieve Julius Caesar in Alexandria in 48/47 B.C.E., but Antipater persuaded them to change sides by showing them a letter from the high priest Hyrcanus.There ("the city of righteousness," transhterating the Hebrew word for "righteousness"). This is how Jerusalem is described in Isa. 1:26, where the Hebrew is properly translated in the LXX. Again, the textual change is probably deliberate, this time reflecting positively on Heliopolis and Onias's temple. See Bohak, Joseph and Aseneth, 90-91; A. van der Kooij, "'The Servant of the Lord': A Particular Group of Jews in Egypt according to the Old Greek of Isaiah," in J. van Ruiten and M. Vervenne, eds.. Studies in the Boole of Isaiah (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1997) 383-96. 32. Am. 13.3.1-3 §§62-72. In J.W. 7.426-32 Josephus says that the structure resembled a tower and was 60 cubits in altitude. The British archeologist Flinders Petrie believed that he had found the structure at Tell-el-Yahoudieh; see his Hyksos and Israelite Cities (Cairo: British School of Archeology in Egypt and Egyptian Research Account, 1906) 19-27. His identification of the temple is not accepted, however. Josephus says that it was located 180 stadia or 22.5 Roman miles from Memphis (/. W. 7.426), and this would put it very close to Heliopolis, not at Tell-el-Yahoudieh. There seems to have been more than one Oniad settlement. See Bohak, Joseph and Aseneth, 28-29, and the map at the end of his book, and also the discussion by Kasher, The Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt. 121-32; Taylor, "A Second Temple," 313-20. 33. Gruen, "The Origins and Objectives," 57. 34. Ant. 13. 10.4 §§284-87. The name Chelkias is found in a fragmentary inscription from Egypt which also mentions a sacred precmct (temenos) and uses the word "general" (strategos), but the identification with the son of Onias is not certain. See Horbury and Noy, Jewish Inscriptions of Egypt. 219. 35. A«(. 14.8,1 §§127-32.


71

can be no serious doubt that Onias the general was identical with Onias the priest, and that his settlement in the land of Onias was a military colony.^^ He was allowed to build his temple as a reward for his service, so this must have been several years after his arrival in Egypt.^'' In the Jewish War Josephus claims that "Onias was not actuated by honest motives; his aim was rather to rival the Jews at Jerusalem, against whom he harbored resentment for his exile, and he hoped by erecting this temple to attract the multitude away from them to it." He allegedly promised Philometor that he would make the Jews his allies against the Seleucids.^^ No doubt the Ptolemy welcomed him for political reasons. Egypt had twice been invaded by Antiochus Epiphanes, and the Ptolemies had ruled Judea until the recent past. Resentment on the part of Onias over his exile would also have been natural in the circumstances. Whether he intended his temple in Egypt to rival Jerusalem, however, is quite another matter. Some scholars, most notably Momigliano, have taken Josephus at face value on this point and assumed that Onias was trying to cause a s c h i s m . B u t this view is highly implausible. If Onias wanted to set up a temple that would be a center for Egyptian Jewry and rival Jerusalem, he would have had to set it up in Alexandria. A temple near Heliopolis can only have been the sanctuary of the local military colony, like the earlier temple at Elephantine.*'* Onias was evidently a leading figure in Egyptian Judaism, and there is no record that his temple was ever a bone of contention. Whatever ill feeling originally existed between Onias IV and the Hasmoneans had apparently been dissipated by the next generation. Ananias, the son of Onias IV, is

36. Gruen, "The Origins and Objectives," 59, objects that Josephus does not explicitly identify Onias the priest with Onias the general, but in view of the military history of the land of Onias, there can be no real doubt about the matter. 37. Tcherikover, Helleiiislic Civilization, 279-80; M. Delcor, "Le Temple d'Onias en Egypte,"RS75 (1968) 188-205. Josephus (Am. 13.3.1 [64]) says that Onias lived at first in Alexandria. Gruen proposes a similar dale for different reasons ("The Origins and Objectives," 69). A. Kasher, "Political and National Connections between the Jews of Ptolemaic Egypt and Their Brethren in Eretz Israel," in M. Mor, ed., Eretz Israel, Israel, and the Jewish Diaspora: Mutual Relations (Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1991) 30, argues that the temple was only built when Onias (and Philometor) had lost all hope of returning to Jerusalem. Modrzejewski, The.Jews of Egypt, 124-25, claims that Onias was a high dignitary at the Ptolemaic court by 164 B . C . E . He bases this claim on a papyrus from that year, which allegedly conveys the greetings of the king to "Onias" and also an exhortation that as many people as possible should work the fields. The reading of the name is uncertain, however. See Gruen, "The Origins and Objectives," 55-56. 38. J.W. 7.10.2-3 §§423-31. In the letter to Philometor in Ant. 13.3.1 §§65-66, however, Onias claims that his motive is to unite the Jews in Egypt, most of whom allegedly had temples! 39. A. Momigliano, Alien Wisdom: The Limits of Hellenization (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975) 118. 40. Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization, 280; Hegermann, "The Diaspora," 141; Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 128. Gruen's objection that "this theory fails to account for the endurance of the temple" ("The Origins and Objectives," 59) is groundless. It endured because the local Jewish community endured.

72


known to have used his influence with Queen Cleopatra III on behalf of Alexander Jannaeus. The words attributed to Ananias by Josephus are significant: "For I would have you know that an injustice done to this man will make all us Jews your enemies" (Ant. 13.13.2 §354). Whatever regional diversity existed in Judaism and whatever the relation of the Oniad temple to Jerusalem, ethnic solidarity prevailed. Again in the time of Julius Caesar, the soldiers from the land of Onias were swayed by a letter from the high priest In Jerusalem. There is no evidence whatever of schismatic intentions.'** It is noteworthy that, despite the flagrant violation of Deuteronomic law posed by a temple outside Jerusalem, later Rabbinic Judaism stopped short of condemning the Oniad temple outright. The Mishnah allows that offerings made in the temple of Onias were acceptable to God in some circumstances, although priests who officiated there would not be acceptable in the Jerusalem temple (Menahot 13:10). The Talmud confirms this view and adds explicitly that the temple of Onias was not idolatrous.*^ We have no literature that is attributed to Onias or his followers in the ancient sources. Oniad authorship has been proposed for several Hellenistic Jewish writings, and we will argue that it is plausible in the case of some sections of the Sibylline Oracles, but any such attribution is of necessity hypothetical. Our only certain knowledge of the people of the land of Onias must be gleaned from the scanty evidence of epitaphs from Tell el-Yehoudieh, which range in date from the mid-second century B.C.E. to the early second century C.E."*^ These epitaphs prove that Tell el-Yehoudieh was (at least part of) the land of Onias, and that the residents viewed it as their homeland. 'The land which nourished us is called the land of Onias," reads one epitaph, in response to the request, "Tell me your country (patran)."^^ A little more than half the names are distinctively Jewish. Some are Hellenized forms of biblical names (e.g., Abramos, lesous); other distinctively Jewish names include Dositheus, Sabbataios, and Sambathion. Other names that were popular with Jews, but not distinctive, are Eirene, Arsinoe, and Agathokles. Members of the same family 4L Gruen, "The Origins and Objectives," 69, goes to the other extreme and suggests that the temple of Leontopolis v/as "a beacon announcing that the faith was alive and strong" in the dark days when there was no High Priest in Jerusalem (159-152 B . C . E . ) . But despite his claim to the contrary, it would then have had no raison d'etre after the Hasmoneans assumed the high priesthood. There is no evidence whatever that the Hasmoneans would have viewed the temple in Egypt as "reinforcement," and it is surely incredible that Onias would have wanted to reinforce the people who had usurped the office that was his by right. 42. b. Menahot 109a-b. Gruen, "The Origins and Objectives," 62; Parente, "Onias III," 77, 81. 43. Horbury and Noy, Jewish Inscriptions. 51-182 (nos. 29-105); CIJ, 2:1451-1530; CPJ, 3:145-63; H. Lietzmann, "Jiidisch-griechische Inschriften aus Teil-el-Yehudieh," ZNW 22 (1923) 280-86. 44. Horbury and Noy, Jewish Inscriptions, 90, no. 38; Kasher, The Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt, 127.


73

could have Jewish and Greek names.*^ It is impossible to be sure whether some of the epitaphs are Jewish or not. One Hebrew inscription was allegedly found, but it was lost when a boat overturned on the Nile. The Hebrew letters heth and 'ayin are also found on a stone, but all the extant epitaphs are in Greek. The idiom is also Greek. The abode of the dead is Hades: "Suddenly, Hades came and snatched me away," reads one epitaph.*^ Another says, "The all-subduer ipandamator = Chronos) himself carried him off to Hades."*'' Moira, fate, is mentioned once.*^ Only a few articulate a belief in hfe after death, a lower proportion than in epitaphs from other parts of the Diaspora.*^ One epitaph professes "a good hope of mercy."^'' Another says that "this grave hides in its bosom my chastely nurtured body, but my soul has flown to the holy ones."^* But these are exceptional.Some epitaphs clearly entertain no hope of an af~ terhfe: "I then with no portion or joy was laid here . . . under the earth."^^ Peter Fraser has argued of Egyptian Judaism in the Ptolemaic period, "In the course of a century and a half its religious beliefs, under the impact of the surrounding Greco-Egyptian population, became a curious mixture of Greek, Egyptian and Jewish elements."^* But the syncretism may be quite superficial. Neither the adoption of the name Hades for the netherworld nor poetic flourishes about Fate in the context of epitaphs requires more than a superficial familiarity with Greek thought. With rare exceptions, the epitaphs do not discourse on the beliefs of the dead. The epitaphs from the land of Onias seem to fit in quite well with those from other parts of the Diaspora.

T h e B a c k g r o u n d of O n i a s The career of Onias must be seen against the background of the Oniad family in the pre-Maccabean period. Two documents are especially important in this 45. Horbury and Noy, Jewish Inscriptions, xviii. 46. Horbury and Noy, Jewish Inscriptions, 61, no. 31. 47. Ibid., 95, no. 39. 48. Ibid., 70, no. 33. 49. U. Fischer, Eschalologie und Jenseitserwarlung im Hellenistischen Diasporajudenlum (BZNW 44; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1978) 226-42. For attitudes to death and afterlife in Diaspora Judaism generally, see P. van der Horst, Ancient Jewish Epitaphs (Kampen: KokPharos, 1991) 114-26. 50. Horbury and Noy, Jewish Inscriptions, 82, no. 36. 51. Ibid., 70, no. 33. 52. Fischer, Eschatologie und Jenseilserwartung, 238: "Jenseitshoffnungen spielen so gut wie keine Rolle." 53. Horbury and Noy, Jewish Inscriptions, 64, no. 32. 54. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1:83. Compare Fischer, Eschatologie und Jenseilserwartung, 237-42.

74


context. The story of the Tobiads in Josephus (Ant. 12.6.1 §265-13.10.7 §300) is widely believed to rest on an independent literary composition, from the middle or late second century B.C.E.^^ 2 Maccabees is an abridgment from the late second century of the five-volume history of Jason of Cyrene, which was probably composed not long after the Maccabean revolt.Recently Jonathan Goldstein has attempted to reconstruct a propagandistic history, allegedly written by Onias IV, from the accounts of the Oniads and Tobiads in these two w o r k s . D e s p i t e Goldstein's ingenuity, there is in fact no reason to believe that such a work by Onias IV ever existed, but the material is significant for the light it sheds on the Ptolemaic influence on Jewish political identity in the second century B.C.E.

The Tale of the Tobiads The story of the Tobiads in Josephus has been described by Hengel as a "romance" and dated to the second half of the second century B.C.E. since "on the one hand it contains such gross errors that one must assume that a considerable space of time had elapsed since the events described, but on the other hand it has such exact information that it is probable that it used good sources like a family chronicle of the Tobiads."^^ The errors involve a highly confused chronology. Tcherikover and others have shown that the emergence of Joseph, the son of Tobias, which is here set in the time of Ptolemy V Epiphanes, should be located in the reign of Ptolemy III Euergetes (246-221 B.C.E.), and in fact the king is once referred to as Euergetes in Ant. 12.4.1 §158.^^ The mistaken assertion in Ant. 12.4.1 §154 that Antiochus III gave over Coele-Syria, Samaria, Judea, and Phoenicia to Ptolemy V Epiphanes as a dowry is an attempt to explain why the Tobiads had their dealings with the Ptolemies in the time of Epiphanes, after the region had passed to the 55. Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization. 140-42; M. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism (2 vols.; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974) 1:269. 56. So C. Habicht, 2 Makkabderbuch (JSHRZ 1.3; Gutersloh: Mohn, 1976) 175; U. Kellermann, Auferstanden in den Himmel: 2 Makkabder 7 und die Auferstehung der Martyrer (SBS 95; Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1979) 13; Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, 1:96-98. Hengel summarizes the conflicting opinions of older scholarship. 57. J. Goldstein, "The Tales of the Tobiads," in J. Neusner, ed., Christianity, Judaism, and Other Greco-Roman Cults: Studies for Morton Smith at 60 (lîden: Brill, 1975) 85-123; idem, 7 Maccabees (AB 41; Garden City, N.Y: Doubleday, 1976) 55-61; 90-103; idem, 2 Maccabees (AB 41A; Garden City, N.Y: Doubleday, 1983) 35-37. 58. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, 1:269. On this story as a romance, see also L. M. Wills, The Jewish Novel in the Ancient World (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1995) 187-93. 59. Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization. 128-30; see further J. A. Goldstein, "The Tales of the Tobiads," in J. Neusner, ed., Christianity, Judaism, and Other Greco-Roman Culls: Studies for Morion Smith at 60 (Leiden: Brill, 1975) 85-102.


75

Seleucids. Despite its inaccuracies, the story paints a vivid picture of the Tobiad family before the Maccabean revolt, and of one unorthodox ideal of Jewish life. Josephus praises Joseph the son of Tobias as "a good and generous man who brought the Jewish people from poverty and weakness to a brighter way of life" (Ant. 12.4.10 §224). Whether Josephus found this assessment in his source or added it himself, it reflects well the spirit of the story. While it is quite obvious that Joseph and his son Hyrcanus were motivated by self-interest with little concern for the Jewish people, they were in fact Jews who operated successfully on the international scene and often outwitted their Gentile rivals. Their success and the friendship they enjoyed with the Ptolemies are a source of pride for the Jewish people. The name of Joseph, in a context of dealings with Egypt, and the rivalry between Hyrcanus and his brothers inevitably recall the biblical Joseph s t o r y . T h e r e is no attempt, however, to attribute to these heroes the moral character of Joseph. Joseph the Tobiad becomes a successful tax collector by killing those who resist his demands and by large-scale bribery of the Ptolemaic court.^' He indulges in drunkenness and falls "in love" with a dancing girl. His son Hyrcanus outdoes even his father by giving the Ptolemy a present of two hundred slaves — a hundred boys and a hundred virgin girls. We know from the Zeno papyri that the Tobiads had engaged in slave trading before the middle of the third century Only at one point does a concern for the Jewish law surface: Joseph wishes to have his affair with the dancing girl in secret because of the violation of Jewish law, and his brother substitutes his own daughter to prevent Joseph from having intercourse with a foreigner. It is possible that even this detail was added by Josephus, but in any case it relates to the ethnic purity of the Jewish people rather than to any moral concern. It is interesting to note that avoidance of exogamy does not imply a concern for the whole Jewish law. At no point does the story disapprove of Joseph or of Hyrcanus. Rather, they are presented as heroes, and the positive presentation is mirrored in the sustained approval of the Ptolemaic king. The story maintains the distinctiveness of the Jews, but as a matter of ethnic pride, not religious or moral principle. All of this is rather reminiscent of Artapanus's syncretistic treatment of Moses, which still insists on his superiority to the Gentiles. There is no doubt that the story has a strongly pro-Ptolemaic bias. The rights of the Ptolemies to exact tribute are not questioned. Those who oppose 60. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 99-106, tries to make the biblical allusions central, but this is an exaggeration. 61. Ant. 12.1.5 §§180-85. Joseph put to death the leading chizens of Ascalon and Scythopolis when they refused to comply with his demands. 62. CPJ, 1:118-21. See Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, 1:268.

76


the Ptolemies (the high priest Onias in the time of Joseph) and those who oppose the pro-Ptolemaic Hyrcanus (his brothers and, by association, the high priest Simon, who is lauded by Ben Sira [Ant. 12.4.11 §229]) are depicted as villains. Hyrcanus is driven to suicide by the rise of Antiochus Epiphanes. The approval of the Ptolemies for Joseph and Hyrcanus is regarded as definitive. Further, the ambitions of Joseph and Hyrcanus are clearly circumscribed by the sovereignty of the Ptolemies. They succeed by ingratiating the Ptolemies. There is no aspiration to independence. As Stern and Goldstein have observed, the story uses the Ptolemaic terminology "Syria and Phoenicia" or "Syria" rather than the Seleucid "Coele-Syria."^^ While the tale is definitely pro-Ptolemaic, it is not especially proOniad, and there is no reason to conclude with Goldstein that it must be the work of the pro-Ptolemaic Onias IV. Against such a conclusion, we must note that the story begins with a very negative portrayal of Onias II, ancestor and namesake of the founder of Leontopolis. This Onias was anti-Ptolemaic and pro-Seleucid, and it is difficult to see why Onias IV should have chosen to emphasize this. Further, Onias III, who is known from 2 Maccabees to have been friendly to Hyrcanus, is not mentioned here in connection with the Tobiads at all. The story of the Tobiads pays minimal attention to the priestly Oniad line and depicts Onias II and Simon in a negative light. Tcherikover's suggestion, that the tale was composed by a descendant of Hyrcanus in Transjordan, is more plausible but remains, of course, conjectural.^* While the tale of the Tobiads does not reflect the views of Onias IV, it does provide valuable background information for his career. The Tobiads, like Onias, found the way to fame and fortune in the service of the Ptolemies. The "land of Tobias" in Transjordan anticipates the "land of Onias" in Egypt by a century.^^ Further, we know from the archeological excavations of the site that a temple was built there in the early second century B.C.E., apparently at the time when Hyrcanus was repulsed from Jerusalem by his brothers and the high priest Simon, after the death of his father.^^ Josephus tells us that at this time Hyrcanus "gave up his intention of returning to Jerusalem."^'' 63. Goldstein, "The Tales of the Tobiads," 107-8; M. Stern, "Notes on the Story of Joseph the Tobiad," Tarbiz 32 (1962) 35-47 (in Hebrew). 64. Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization, 141-42. Hengel (Judaism and Helletdsm, 2.179n.78) approves Willrich's suggestion that the work was composed in Egypt, but without supporting argument. Goldstein ("Tlie Tales of the Tobiads," 103) denies that the work can be a family history because it ignores the earlier glories of the Tobiads, but we simply do not know whether the original document recorded the earlier history of the family or was only concerned with its relations to the Ptolemies. 65. CPJ, 1:116; B. Mazar, "The Tobiads," lEJ 7 (1957) 137-45; 229-38. 66. Ant. 12.4.11 §§228-34. For the archeological evidence, see P. V/. Lapp, "The Second and Third Campaigns at 'Araq el-Emir," BASOR 171 (1963) 8-39. Lapp concluded that "The Qasr emerges as a unique example of the old Syrian temple type in the Hellenistic period." 67. Ant. 12.4.11 §229.


77

Yet Hengel is not justified in assuming that he intended to build "a temple to compete with Jerusalem."^^ If this were so, he would scarcely have deposited funds in the temple at Jerusalem in the time of Onias III.^^ Rather, the temple was for his own convenience, since he appears to have had a self-sufficient domain in Transjordan. His continued relationship with the temple in the time of Onias III shows that he did not see any incompatibility between the two temples. Significantly, Onias III did not find the Tobiad temple objectionable either. All of this casts much light on the actions of Onias IV. While he inevitably rejected the Hasmonean priesthood, there is no reason to believe that he would have definitively rejected the Jerusalem temple. He would also naturally have seen that his future role in Jewish affairs was dependent on the actions and attitudes of the Ptolemies.™

2 Maccabees and the Oniads Our second source for the history of the Oniads is 2 Maccabees. Unlike the story of the Tobiads in Josephus, 2 Maccabees does deal at length with Onias III, who is described in glowing terms as "the benefactor of the city, the guardian of his fellow countrymen and zealot for the laws" (2 Mace. 4:2). 2 Maccabees records only good and no evil of Onias III. Because of his piety, the city of Jerusalem enjoyed peace and the laws were observed (3:1). He received Hehodorus (the delegate of the Seleucid king) graciously, and it was through his intercession that the life of Heliodorus was spared by the angels sent to chastise him (3:33). When he appealed to the king against the intrigues of Simon, it was not to accuse his fellow citizens but to preserve the welfare of all the people (4:5). Finally, he was murdered because he rebuked Menelaus for his abuse of the temple vessels (4:34). In all Onias III is a major figure in 2 Maccabees, in sharp contrast to 1 Maccabees, which ignores him entirely. The prominence which Onias enjoys in 2 Maccabees has led Goldstein to suggest that the hypothetical "propagandistic work of Onias IV" served as a source here too,'^^ but his arguments do not warrant the conclusion. There is 68. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, 1:274. Hengel suggests a parallel to the sanctuaries of Elephantine, Leontopolis, and Gerizim, but Elephantine was definitely not in competition with Jerusalem, Leontopolis is disputed, and there is nothing to suggest that either Hyrcanus or Onias led a movement as distinct as the Samaritans. 69. 2 Mace. 3:11. See Tcherikover (Hellenistic Civilization, 138), who asserts that Hyrcanus did not give up his desire to return to Jerusalem and suggests that he may have lived there for a time. 70. The suicide of Hyrcanus was prompted not only by the accession of Antiochus Epiphanes but by the weakness of Egypt after the death of Ptolemy Epiphanes. Hyrcanus did not have a patron to protect him (Ant. 12.4.11 §§234-36). 71. J. A. Goldstein, 1 Maccabees (AB 41; Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1976) 58-61, 90; idem, "The Tales of the Tobiads," 112-13.

78


nothing to suggest that the piety of Onias III is the exclusive cause of the city's welfare in 2 Mace. 3:1, or that this passage is in any tension with the rest of 2 Maccabees. The association of Onias III with the pro-Ptolemaic Hyrcanus in 2 Mace. 3:11, which Goldstein takes as "conclusive proof of an Oniad source, may be simply historical fact. The hypothesis of a document written by Onias IV is unnecessary.-"^ Goldstein is on firmer ground when he argues that the neglect of Onias III in 1 Maccabees and in Josephus arises from a pro-Hasmonean Tendenz.^^ The account in 2 Maccabees, despite its penchant for the miraculous,'''* fills in an important area of the history of this period and supplies the most immediate background we have to Onias IV. To be sure, 2 Maccabees exaggerates the pietistic character of Onias III. His involvement in political intrigue may fairly be deduced from his association with Hyrcanus and should in any case be expected from his family history. The fact that he took refuge in the sanctuary near Daphne (presumably the temple of Apollo and Artemis) just before his death shows that he did not have a great aversion to pagan religion. We should also bear in mind that Jason, who initiated the socalled Hellenistic reform, was the brother of Onias III and uncle of Onias IV. The portrayal which we find in 2 Maccabees is clearly idealized for the author's purposes.

2 M a c c a b e e s a n d the Diaspora The importance of 2 Maccabees for our purpose does not lie only in the background history of the Oniads. It also provides significant insight into relations between Jerusalem and the Egyptian Diaspora in the second century B.C.E. Jason of Cyrene, whose five-volume work is abridged in 2 Maccabees, "either came from the Jewish Diaspora in Cyrenaica or at least spent a good part of his life there,"^^ as his name indicates. Yet the content of his work deals entirely with events in Palestine. Hengel has plausibly suggested that 72. See further the critique of Goldstein by R. Doran, Temple Propaganda: The Purpose and Character of 2 Maccabees (CBQMS 12; Washington, D.C.: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1981) 17-19. 73. Goldstein, 1 Maccabees, 56-57. Note also the tendentious criticism of Philometor in 1 Mace. 11:8-19 and contrast Ant. 13.4.5-9 §§103-20. 74. Wills, The Jewish Novel, 193-201, classifies 2 Maccabees as an historical novel. 75. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, 1:95; H. W. Attridge, "Historiography," in M. E. Stone, ed., Jewish Wntings of the Second Temple Period (CRINT 2.2; Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984) 177. Hengel reviev/s the spectrum of scholarly opinion as to whether Jason was an eyewitness of the events he describes and rightly concludes that Jason probably spent some time in Judea in those years.


79

the intention of Jason's work "was to gain some understanding and support in the Greek-speaking Diaspora and the Greek world in general for the Jews who were fighting for the integrity of their sanctuary and their piety."^^ We should not be surprised that a work which supports the Maccabean rebellion was composed in Greek, following Hellenistic conventions and style.'''' The Maccabees were not xenophobic, as can be seen from their delegations to Rome and S p a r t a . J a s o n stands with Eupolemus as a supporter of the Maccabees who was still concerned to build bridges with the Hellenistic world. The view of Judaism presented in 2 Maccabees may reasonably be described as covenantal nomism. When the laws were well observed, because of the piety of Onias III, the city was inhabited in unbroken peace (3:1). The sufferings of the persecution were not designed to destroy but to discipline the people (5:12). Even the martyrs suffered for the sins of the people, but they helped to bring an end to the wrath of God (7:38). In a typical prayer in 8:15, the Jews call upon God to rescue them "if not for their own sake, at least for the sake of the covenants made with their fathers" (8:15). The primary emphasis, then, is on God's covenant with the people, but individuals can fall from the covenant relationship by their sins. So in 2 Mace. 12:40 all the Jews killed in the battle against Gorgias are found to have idols under their tunics. The temple plays a pivotal role in 2 Maccabees, but nonetheless it is clear that "the Lord did not choose the nation for the sake of the holy place, but the place for the sake of the nation" (5:19). The covenantal relationship between the people and God provides the underpinning for the political and geographical factors in Jewish identity. The attitude of 2 Maccabees to the Gentiles is ambiguous. On the one hand, throughout the book the Gentiles are the adversaries of the Jews, the "blasphemous and barbarous nations" (10:4). On the other hand, 2 Maccabees suggests that Gentiles are impressed by Jewish piety. Even Antiochus Epiphanes "was grieved at heart and filled with pity" at the death of Onias III because of his moderation and good conduct (2 Mace. 4:37), and Nicanor was warmly attached to Judas (2 Mace. 14:24). There is also a persistent hope for the conversion of the Gentiles, which is fantasized in the confession of Heliodorus (2 Mace. 3:35-40) and the deathbed conversion of Antiochus Epiphanes (2 Mace. 9:13-18). The relation of the Diaspora to Jerusalem is directly brought into question by the two letters which are prefixed to the abridgment of Jason's history. The first, 1:1-9, is dated to the year 188 of the Seleucid era, or 124/23 76. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, 1:97. 77. On the Hellenistic form of 2 Maccabees and of Jason's work, see Doran, Temple Propaganda; idem, "2 Maccabees and 'Tragic History,'" HUCA 50 (1979) 107-14. 78. 1 Mace. 8, 12; 2 Mace. 4:11.

80


and contains a reference to an earlier letter from 143/42 B.C.E.^^ The second letter is undated and its provenance is disputed. Some scholars hold that it is a late composition from approximately 60 B.C.E.^*^ Others distinguish an interpolation in the legend about the temple fire and allow that the rest of the letter may be old.^^ Both letters invite the Jews of Egypt to join their Judean brethren in celebrating the purification of the temple by observing the festival of Hanukkah, which is called "the feast of Tabernacles in the month of Kislev" (1:9). The relation of these letters to the rest of 2 Maccabees is problematic. It is unlikely that either letter was composed by the epitomator, in view of the lack of cross-references. The second letter actually contradicts the main text of 2 Maccabees on the manner of the death of Antiochus Epiphanes.^•^ Yet there is a measure of congruity between the invitation of the letters and the history itself.^^ Glorification of the Jerusalem temple is undeniably a major theme of 2 Maccabees.^* It is possible that the abridgment of Jason's history was undertaken to provide support for the promotion of the festival, as Momigliano suggests,^^ or that the author of the letter seized on 2 Maccabees as a convenient and suitable account which supported his general enthusiasm for the temple. B.C.E.,

In any case, the question arises what message 2 Maccabees would bear for the Jews of the Egyptian Diaspora. Momigliano has proposed that "like the introductory letters, the epitome would try to keep the Jews of Egypt within the influence of the temple of Jerusalem against the competition of the temple of Leontopolis," and so help to avoid the "fragmentation of Judaism and the secession of the Egyptian Jews."^^ This view is an elaboration of a 79. The authenticity of this letter was established by E. J. Bickerman, "Ein jUdischer Festbrief vom Jahre 124 v. Chr. (II Mace 1.1-9)," 2 ^ 3 2 (1933) 233-54 (reprinted in Studies in Jewish and Christian History [3 vols.; AGJU 9; Leiden: Brill, 1976-86] 2:136-58). See Habicht, 2 Makicabaerbuch, 199-201. 80. So Bickerman, Studies in Jewish and Christian History, 2:137; Habicht, 2 Makkabderbuch, 199. 81. A. Momigliano ("The Second Book of Maccabees," Classical Philology 70 [1975] 84) expresses doubts about the authenticity of the second letter but "should like to leave open the possibility that the writer of the first letter was misled by what he considered an authentic letter of Judas" and so that the second letter was composed before 124 B . C . E . T . Fischer, "Maccabees, Books of: First and Second Maccabees," ABD, 4:444, asserts that "this document is really the sole authentic surviving record of Judas Maccabeus himself" • 82. See Doran, Temple Propaganda, 6-7; Momigliano, "The Second Book," 81-82. 83. Fischer, "First and Second Maccabees," 443, claims that "the common purpose of estabhshing the annual festival of Hanukkah . . . unifies the different parts of the writing." 84. Habicht, 2 Makkabderbuch, 186-87. The importance of the temple in 2 Maccabees has been stressed by virtually all commentators. Doran has characterized the book as "Temple Propaganda" and emphasized its affinity with Hellenistic accounts of the epiphanic defense of cities ("2 Maccabees and Tragic History," 113-14). 85. Momigliano, "The Second Book," 83. 86. Ibid. Compare idem. Alien Wisdom, 119. Cf Attridge, "Historiography," 183; Fischer, "First and Second Maccabees," 443.

RELIGION A N D POLITICS: THE PTOLEMAIC ERA

81

widespread scholarly opinion that 2 Maccabees contains an implicit polemic against the temple of Leontopolis.^-^ In fact, the presence of such polemic is highly dubious. The relations between Judaism and the Diaspora reflected in 2 Maccabees are far more complex than Momigliano suggests. The claim that either 2 Maccabees or the letters prefixed to it contain a polemic against the temple of Leontopolis has been soundly refuted by Arenhoevel and D o r a n . N o w h e r e in the book is there any explicit reference to Leontopolis, nor even any insistence on the unique validity of Jerusalem as a place of worship. The complete lack of reference to Leontopolis may have a simple enough explanation; it is quite possible that Jason wrote his history before the temple of Onias was built. There is no doubt that the temple was in existence by the time the first letter was written, but here again it is simply ignored. The letter does not command the Jews to desist from worshipping at other places but only to observe the festival of Hanukkah. The second letter concludes with the hope that God "will soon have mercy on us and will gather us together from under heaven to the Holy Place" (2:18). This passage reflects the hope for a definitive Jewish restoration around the temple in Jerusalem. There is no reason, however, why Onias IV and his followers should not have shared that hope, or why it should be considered incompatible with an interim sanctuary at Leontopolis. In short, the silence of the letters on the subject of Leontopolis is not necessarily an indication of polemic. It may simply indicate that the temple in Egypt was never seriously considered as a rival to that of Jerusalem. Yet the view that 2 Maccabees in its present form was designed to maintain the unity of Judaism is not without basis. It is noteworthy that at least two letters were sent from Jerusalem to Egypt, urging the observance of the festival. The earlier (the former letter referred to in 1:7) must have gone unheeded if a second (the present first letter) was necessary. In fact, we should not be surprised if Egyptian Judaism hesitated to celebrate the revolt. At least Onias IV and his followers must have been initially estranged from the Jerusalem temple and its illegitimate priesthood. The letters which call on the Diaspora Jews to celebrate the purification of the temple are attempting to overcome that estrangement, even though they are not necessarily condemning Leontopolis. The letters do this merely by asserting that the purification of the temple was an act of divine deliverance. The abridgment of Jason's history may also be seen to contribute to this goal by Its presentation of the story of the revolt. 87. Habicht, 2 Makkabderbuch, 186; Bickerman, "Ein jiidischer Festbrief," 154-55; F. M. Abel, Les Livres des Maccabees (Paris: Gabalda, 1949) xliv. 88. D. Arenhoevel, Die Theokratie nach dem L und 2. Makkabderbuch (Mainz: Matthias-Grunewald, 1967) 100-102; Doran, Temple Propaganda, 11-12. Cf also Kasher, "Political and National Connections," 31.

82


Two aspects of 2 Maccabees are especially significant for the relation between Palestinian and Egyptian Judaism. The first is the glorification of Onias III. It is difficult to see how the entirely positive portrayal of the father of Onias IV could serve as a polemic against Leontopolis, especially when there is no hint that his son departed from his father's ways. Rather, the virtue of the father creates the presumption of virtue in the son. 2 Maccabees makes amply clear that the misfortunes which befell Jerusalem stemmed from the overthrow of Onias. While the book does not argue for the restoration of the Oniad line, the portrayal of the history leading up to the revolt would surely be acceptable to the supporters of Onias IV in Egypt. Scholars have often noted the relative lack of attention to the Hasmonean house in 2 M a c c a b e e s . J u d a s is indeed the hero, but Mattathias is overlooked and the brothers have a subsidiary role. We are indeed told that Judas placed his brothers "Simon, Joseph, and Jonathan" in charge of divisions (8:22),^'^ but Jonathan is never mentioned again. The heroic death of Eleazar (1 Mace. 6:43-46) is ignored, although the occasion is mentioned in 2Macc. 13:15.Simon is mentioned in 10:19-20, where some of his men take bribes and let some of their enemies escape from a siege. Judas has to intervene to punish the offenders. Again in 14:15-18, Simon is checked until Nicanor hears of the valor of Judas. Neither reference is flattering to Simon. The fact that 2 Maccabees concludes before the death of Judas and does not pursue the careers of Simon and Jonathan may be simply due to the early date at which Jason's history was written. At the time of the abridgment, or of the composition of the first letter, the omission of the history of Simon and Jonathan was significant. Judas had never claimed the high priesthood. He had no part in supplanting the house of Onias. On the contrary, he was the instrument of God's wrath against the sinners who had disrupted the priesthood. 2 Maccabees even claims the support of Onias III for Judas by having him appear in a vision in 2 Mace. 15:11-16. The story of Judas, then, might be acceptable to the followers of Onias in Egypt as part of the common Jewish heritage, while the story of his brothers would not.^^ A history which in effect separated the temple and the story of the revolt from the Hasmonean priest-kings could avoid party dissensions and enable the Jews of the Diaspora to affirm both the temple and the independent Jewish state without acknowledging the legitimacy of the Hasmo89. See G. W. E. Nickelsburg, "1 and 2 Maccabees — Same Story, Different Meaning," CTM 42 (1971) 515-26 (esp. 524). In this respect 2 Maccabees is in sharp contrast to I Maccabees. 90. Joseph is apparently an error for John (cf 1 Mace. 2:2). 91. Gruen overlooks the silence of 2 Maccabees on the Hasmonean dynasty when he claims that 2 Maccabees expresses "a common purpose between Hasmonaeans and Oniads" ("The Origins and Objectives," 70).


83

neans. In fact, neither the introductory letters nor the text of 2 Maccabees makes any attempt to subordinate the Diaspora to Jerusalem. The implications of the book for Egyptian Judaism are highly conciliatory. There is no polemic, but rather an affirmation of the acceptable common ground and an avoidance of those issues which might prove to be divisive. The ideal of Judaism which is held forth is not primarily political but is based on the pious observance of the law, and includes the hope of the martyrs for resurrection. The law-abiding Jew is content to live in peace and give no offense to his neighbor, as can be seen in the concern of Onias III for Heliodorus in 2 Maccabees 3.^^

T h e Third Sibyl The first major document of the Diaspora which explicitly addresses political relations is the Third Sibylline Oracle. The sibyl was a legendary figure in the Greek and Roman world.^^ Originally associated with Asia Minor, she was also linked to Cumae in Italy from the sixth century B.C.E. Tarquinius Superbus, the last king of Rome, was believed to have initiated a collection of sibylline verses in Rome, where they were consulted in times of crisis by decree of the senate.^* By the Hellenistic age, however, sibylline oracles had proliferated and there were supposed to be multiple sibyls, including Babylonian, Persian, Egyptian, and eventually Hebrew sibyls as well as Greek.^^ The character of the sibyl is already clear in the earliest allusion to her by Heraclitus: 'The sibyl, with frenzied lips, uttering words mirthless, unembellished, unperfumed, yet reaches to a thousand years with her voice through the god."^^ We have only scattered examples of sibylline oracles from pagan sources. Like other Greek oracles, they were typically written in epic hexameters. They predict destruction, by war or by natural disasters. A passage in Sib. Or. 3:401-88, which is usually attributed to a pagan Erythrean sibyl, and which predicts assorted natural and military disasters, may give a

92. Cf. Doran, Temple Propaganda, 16. 93. See the comprehensive review by H. W. Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy in Classical Antiquity (ed. B. C. McGing; London: Routledge, 1988). 94. On the Roman collection, see H. Cancik, "Libri Fatales: Romische Offenbarungsliteratur und Geschichtstheologie," in D. Hellholm, ed., Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East (Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1983) 549-76. 95. There are several lists of sibyls. One of the most famous, by the Roman antiquarian Varro, preserved in Lactantius, Divinae Instilutiones 1.6, lists ten sibyls. Pausanias, in the second century C . E . , mentions a sibyl of the Hebrews (Pausanias 10.12). For critical discussion see Parke, Sibyls, 23-50. 96. Plutarch, De Pythiae Oraculis 6 (397A).

84


fair impression of the genre. The individual oracles are brief and strung together loosely. Oracle collections were notoriously fluid. New oracles could easily be inserted, and predictions could be transferred from one prophetic source to another. The Jews of the Hellenistic age inherited a long tradition of gloomy prophecy, noted for its predictions of wars, famines, and pestilence. These prophecies, too, were often loosely structured and full of interpolations. It is not surprising that the sibylline genre had some attraction for Jews who wished to express themselves in the media of Greek culture. The reason why a Jewish author might choose to write in the name of the sibyl is clear enough: to put the praise of Judaism in the mouth of a pagan prophetess of hoary antiquity and respected authority. Even if Gentiles greeted such compositions with skepticism, as we might expect, the apparent endorsement of the sibyl could bolster the self-confidence of Jews and their pride in their tradition. The genre lent itself to prophecies of destruction and a tone of denunciation. Consequently, John Barclay sees here a prime example of "cultural antagonism," dominated by "scorn of non-Jews" and Jewish national aspirations.^'' But if the Jewish writers felt only scorn for non-Jews and their culture, why would they write in epic hexameters, in the name of a pagan prophetess? Sibylline oracles are often vehicles for hostility towards the Gentile world, especially in the Roman era when Egyptian Jewry was in open conflict with Romans, Greeks, and Egyptians. But it is difficult to believe that Jewish authors originally chose this genre to express only cultural antagonism. Besides, as Parke has observed, "the Jewish Sibyllist did not deal solely in gloom."^^ At least the Third Sibylline Oracle has a well-developed positive message as well.^^ The attitude of the Jewish sibyllist to the Gentile world is far more complex than Barclay's sweeping characterization allows. Virtually all scholars have recognized that Sib. Or. 3 is a composite work.''*'* Verses 1-92 seem to be the conclusion of a different book, as is indicated by an annotation in the manuscripts after verse 92. Verses 93-96 are an isolated fragment, so book 3 proper begins at verse 97. (The original beginning is lost.) It is also generally recognized that the oracles against various nations in 97. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 216-28. 98. Parke, Sibyls, 13. 99. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 287, acknowledges that "the Sibyl reaches out to the Hellenic world." See also the remarks of M. Simon, "Sur quelques aspects des Oracles Sibyllins juifs," in Hellholm, ed.. Apocalypticism, 232; and J. J. Collins, "The Jewish Transformation of Sibylline Oracles," in idem. Seers, Sibyls, and Sages in Hellenistic-Roman Judaism (Leiden: Brill, 1997) 181-97. 100. I presuppose here my earlier discussion of the source-critical questions; see J. J. Collins, The Sibylline Oracles of Egyptian Judaism (SBLDS 13; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1974) 21-34; idem, "The Sibylline Oracles," in OTP, 1:354-80; idem, "The Sibylline Oracles," in Stone, ed., Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period. 365-71; idem, "The Development of the Sibylline Tradition," ANRW, II.20.1, 430-33. See also H. Merkel, Sibyllinen, (JSHRZ 5.8; Giitersloh: GUtersloher Verlagshaus, 1998).


85

verses 350-80 are of diverse origin and include some oracles of pagan provenance. Most scholars, however, recognize a main corpus in the remainder of the book.^"*^ This corpus is loosely structured and is a series of oracles rather than a single formal unit, but it has a coherent message and may be ascribed to a common source in the second century B.C.E. The date is indicated by recurring references to the "seventh king" of Egypt in verses 193, 318, and 608. While there is broad consensus that a corpus of oracles from the second century B.C.E. can be identified here, it has not gone unchallenged. Valentin Nikiprowetzky, in an erudite monograph, argued that the book should be viewed as a redactional unity and dated to the time of Cleopatra VII.^"^^ This argument identifies Cleopatra as "the seventh king," but it has found no followers. More recently, Erich Gruen has tried to strip the reference to the seventh king of all chronological significance. "The number," we are told, "must be understood as carrying mystical import, an abstract and spiritual sense, not the denotation of a royal tenure."^"^ But the wording of the sibyl leaves no doubt that the reference is to a very specific royal tenure: "the seventh reign when a king of Egypt, who will be of the Greeks by race, will rule" (vss. 192-93); "when the young seventh king of Egypt rules his own land, numbered from the dynasty of the Greeks" (vss. 608-9). The fact that the number seven is used elsewhere by the sibyl "without reference to any kings, let alone Ptolemies,"^'^* does not in any way lessen or obscure the clear reference to a Ptolemaic king in these passages. While the number seven might be chosen as an ideal number, it would have lacked credibility when it was clear that there had been more than seven Ptolemaic kings. 101.1 define the main corpus as vss. 97-349 and 489-829. Cf G. W. Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature between the Bible and the Mishnah (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981) 161-65. The more usual division of the book, however, defines the first section as vss. 97-294, and the second as 295-488. See, e.g., V. Nikiprowetzky, La Troisieme Sibylle (Paris: Mouton, 1970) 55; M. Goodman, in Schiirer, The History of the Jewish People, 3.1:633. Vss. 295-349 belong with vss. 350-488, insofar as they are oracles against various nations, but they are linked to the main corpus by some distinctively Jewish references and mention of "the seventh generation of kings." 102. V. Nikiprowetzky, IM Troisieme Sibylle, 215. An even later date is proposed by A. Paul, "Les Pseudepigraphes Juifs de Langue Grecque," in R. Kuntzmann and J. Schlgsser, eds., ttudes sur la Judaisme Hellenistique (Paris: Cerf, 1984) 90, on the grounds that Egyptian Judaism would not have produced an apocalyptic work before the late first century B . C . E . The classification of Sib. Or. 3 as apocalyptic, however, is imprecise. 103. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 277. Gruen argues that the number seven appears in apocalyptic literature, but he does not observe how it is used. In fact, it is never used in "an abstract and spiritual sense" in apocalyptic literature. See A. Yarbro Collins, "Numerical Symbolism in Jewish and Early Christian Apocalyptic Literature," in eadem. Cosmology and Eschatology in Jewish and Christian Apocalypticism (Leiden: Brill, 1996) 55-138 104. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 277. 105. Cf Goodman, in Schiirer, The History of the Jewish People, 3.1:635: "It is hard to believe that such an assertion could be made after the last king who could be described in this way had died." While numbers were not part of royal titles in antiquity, the names of the

86


The enumeration of the Ptolemies is complicated by the question whether Alexander should be counted and by the overlapping reigns in the second century. There are three possible identifications; Ptolemy VI Philometor, who reigned from 180-164, 163-145; Ptolemy VII Neos Philopator, 145-144; Ptolemy VIII Physcon (also called Euergetes II), 170164, 164-163, and 144-117. The reign of Ptolemy VII was so brief that it might not be counted, especially as Physcon had already been king. Further, while the oracles could not have been written after the latest possible seventh Ptolemy, they could have been written before his reign: the seventh king may be anticipated as a future ruler. The strained relations of the Jews with Physcon make it unlikely that he was the "seventh king" in question, but it is conceivable that a Jewish sibyllist looked forward to a king who would succeed him. However, given the favorable attitude of Philometor to the Jews, a date in his reign is more probable. The seventh king could then refer either to Philometor himself or to his son Neos Philopator. A more specific indication of date may be found in verses 162-95. This refers to the rise of Rome, which will fill many places with evils, but especially Macedonia. Macedonia was divided after the battle of Pydna in 168 B.C.E. and was made a Roman province in 147 B . C . E . T h e reference to Rome as a world power could not be earlier than the battle of Magnesia (190), where Rome defeated Antiochus III of Syria, and probably presupposes the intervention of Rome in Egypt in 168. In view of these considerations, the period when Philometor was sole ruler in 163-145 is the most likely time of composition. Rome was still on the rise in this period, but it is worth noting that the Roman general Scipio, looking on the destruction of Carthage in 146 B.C.E., foresaw the fall of his own city, "realizing that all cities, nations and authorities must, like men, meet their doom," a thought worthy of the sibyl. ^'•^ Ptolemies were well known and counting up to seven was well within the intellectual capability of ancient Jews! 106. In addition to the bibliography in Collins, The Sibylline Oracles, 144, see Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1:709-13; 2:989-99; Goodman in Schiirer, The Hisfoty of the Jewish People, 3,1:636; Merkel, Sibyllinen, 1062-63. 107. Gruen, Heritage atidHellenism. 271, acknowledges the reference but goes on to argue that "no ex eventii forecast could have set the fall of Roman power to that period" (p. 273). But no one has ever suggested that the prophecy of the fall of Rome is ex eventu. Most of the references that he cites in favor of a later date on p. 271 are not regarded as part of the secondcentury core by any modem scholar. He makes a good observation that the short oracle in vss. 156-61 presupposes that Egypt has fallen to Rome. This passage, however, has no necessary bearing on the date of vss. 162-95, where the sequence is different. 108. Appian 8.19.132; Polybius 38.4.22. It is possible that the description of the vices of Rome in Sib. Or 3:179-90 incorporates some glosses from the first century B . C . E . or C . E . , when other additions were made to the book (Goodman, in Schurer, The History of the Jewish People. 3.1:636).


87

Virtually all scholars agree that the work was composed in Egypt. ^"^^ Verse 161 refers to a second world empire of Egypt after that of the Macedonians, and the work is punctuated by references to the seventh king of Egypt. While it is conceivable that these references are the work of a Palestinian sympathizer of the Ptolemies, the lack of specific reference to Palestine makes an Egyptian origin almost certain.

The Content of Sibylline Oracle 3 The opening oracle of Sib. Or. 3 (vss. 97-155) constitutes an introduction to world history. It includes (a) the fall of the tower of Babylon; (b) a euhemeristic account of the war of the Titans against Kronos and his sons (105-55); and (c) a list of world empires (156-61). This section establishes a universal framework for the rest of the book. It introduces the theme of world kingship and shows that it was a cause of strife from the beginning. Most significant here is the attempt to integrate Greek mythology into the overview of history. While the gods are demythologized in euhemeristic fashion, they are not simply dismissed as unreal. This opening section shows most clearly the affinities of the sibyl with the Jewish historians discussed above in Chapter 1.^^'' More broadly, the use of the sibylline form shows that the author, like his Hellenistic Jewish predecessors, was attempting to bridge two cultures. The sibylline form offered some affinities with the prophetic oracles of the Hebrew scriptures, but the more immediate analogy was with the use of oracles for political propaganda in the Hellenistic world.'^^ Here again a Jewish writer was using a Hellenistic form to present his view of Judaism. The oracles that follow the introduction to world history present a recurring pattern: 1. sin, usually idolatry, leads to 2. disaster and tribulation, which is terminated by 3. the advent of a king or kingdom. Within these passages religious and ethical exhortation is supported by a political and eschatological framework. The hortatory sections may fairly be 109. An exception is Fergus Millar, in his review of Nikiprowetzky in JTS 23 (1972) 223-24, who asserts the possibility of a Palestinian origin but does not show that it is more probable. 110. Nikiprowetzky, La Troisieme Sibylle, 112-33. This passage was known to Alexander Polyhistor, who attributed the destruction of the tower of Babel to "the sibyl." See Goodman, in Schiirer, Tlie Histoiy of the Jewish People, 3.1:646-47. 111. Collins, The Sibylline Oracles, 1-19. 112. Ibid., 37.

88


said to contain the view of Judaism which is presented to the Hellenistic world, and they are accordingly of the utmost importance. We will, however, defer the discussion of these passages to Part Two of our study, where they can be compared with other presentations of Jewish ethical and religious requirements. For the present we will focus on the political view of Judaism within which the exhortation is framed. The argument of Sib. Or. 3 is that those who keep the law of God will ultimately prosper, while those who do not will come to destruction. The prosperity of the righteous is envisaged in a peaceful world centered on the Jewish temple, but the manner in which this state is brought about is associated with the reign of an Egyptian king. The role assigned to this king is of crucial importance for understanding the book. Specifically, the question arises whether this king should be identified with the "king from the sun" of verse 652 "who will stop the entire earth from evil war" and so usher in the messianic age, or, alternatively, is not the agent of transformation but merely the indicator of the date when the Jews will come to power.^^^

The Seventh King There are three explicit references to the seventh king. In verses 175-95 we are told that the kingdom which will succeed the Macedonians will endure "until the seventh reign when a king who will be of the Greeks by race, will rule." Then "the people of the great God will again be strong, who will be guides in life for all mortals." The kingdom in question is described as "white and many-headed from the western sea" and is quite unambiguously Rome. Many commentators have found such a denunciation of Rome by a Jew in the second-century-B.c.E. problematic.'^"* Arnaldo Momigliano objects that the hostile allusions to Rome cannot be dated with the reference to the seventh king "since between 170 and 160 both Egypt and Judea were indebted to Rome, and in 161 Judea made an alliance with Rome."^'^ Momigliano, like P e r e t t i , c o n s i d e r s the allusion to Rome a later addition. 113. The latter view has been defended by A. Momigliano, "La Portata Storica dei Vaticini sul Settimo Re nel Terzo Libro degli Oracoli Sibillini," in Forma Futuri (Studi in Onore del Cardinale Michele Pellegrino; Torino: Bottega d'Erasmo, 1975) 1077-84, and it is implied in the interpretation of Nikiprowetzky. So also Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 222. 114. Colhns, The Sibylline Oracles, 31. See especially Nikiprowetzky, La Troisiime Sibylle. 199. 115. Momigliano, "La Portata Storica," 1082. 116. A. Peretti, La Sibilla Babilonese nella Propaganda Ellenistica (Biblioteca di Cultura 21; Firenze: La Nuova Itaha Editrice, 1943) 190.


89

Geffcken preferred to elide the reference to the seventh king."^ Nikiprowetzky, who quite rightly protests that such procedures are unsupported by any textual arguments, dates the entire passage to the first century B.C.E. and takes the seventh king, somewhat paradoxically, as Cleopatra VII.^^^ However, the statement that Rome will "fill everything with evils . . . in many places, but especially in Macedonia" can only refer to the Roman conquest of Macedonia which took place precisely in the reign of Philometor, and so is fully compatible with a second-century "seventh king." The time in question is not long after the Maccabean revolt, and so Momigliano reasons that "it will not be difficult to recognize a precise allusion to the Jewish rebellion in lines 194-5," which say that "the people of the great God will again be strong."^^^ But this inference is far from obvious. The Maccabees looked on Rome as a friend. It is true that Egypt was also protected by Rome from Antiochus Epiphanes, but the role of Rome in Egypt was more complex, because of the civil strife between Philometor and Physcon. At first the Romans supported Philometor, but in 161 he incurred their displeasure by refusing to cede Cyprus to Physcon.^^'^ In view of Philometor's favor towards the Jews, an anti-Roman oracle by an Egyptian Jew is quite conceivable after 161, but not by a supporter of the Maccabees. The friendship between Rome and the Maccabees would not have impressed all the Jews in Egypt favorably, especially those who had fled to Egypt in the wake of the revolt. The fall of Rome is clearly not ex eventu, and neither is the prophecy of the rise of the "people of the great God" in verse 194. So, while this passage does not clarify the eschatological role of the Egyptian king, it provides no reference to the Maccabean revolt either. In fact, the sibyl, quite remarkably, never refers to the Maccabees.'^' Momigliano notes that Daniel does not refer to them clearly either.^^^ In Daniel silence does not mean tacit support. At most, Daniel considered the Maccabees "a little help" (Dan. 11:34), and it is doubtful whether he thought they were any help at all.^'^^ The silence of the sibyl about the revolt would scarcely be credible if the work were written in support of the rebellion as Momigliano claims. The second reference to the seventh king, in verse 318, concerns the 117. J. Geffcken, Die Oracula Sibyllina (GCS 8; Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1902) 58, apparatus to vs. 192. 118. Nikiprowetzky, La Troisieme Sibylle, 208-16. The numeral seven was not part of Cleopatra's title in antiquity, and it is doubtful that she could be referred to as a "king." 119. Momigliano, "La Portata Storica," 1081; cf. idem. Alien Wisdom, 119. So also Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 223. 120. Polybius 31.18,20. Eraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1:120; 2:214 n. 225 and the references in Collins, The Sibylline Oracles, 147n.70. 121. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 223, admits this but still argues that the sibyl is inspired by the nationalistic spirit of the revok. 122. Momigliano, "La Portata Storica," 1081. 123. See J. J. Collins, Daniel (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993) 386.

90


cessation of civil strife in E g y p t . T h e passage may be inspired by the relative calm in the later reign of Philometor, but more likely it is not ex eventu and simply expresses a hope for the future. Egypt continued to be torn by civil strife throughout the Ptolemaic period. The passage throws no light on the relation of this king to the Jews. The third reference claims that men will cast away their idols when the "young seventh king of Egypt rules his own land, numbered from the dynasty of the Greeks" (vss. 608-9).^^^ Again, the passage does not specify the role of the king. The passage goes on to tell how "a great king will come from Asia." The invasion by this king is seen as the prelude, and perhaps the indirect cause, of the conversion of the Egyptians to the one true God. Most scholars have assumed that the king from Asia should be identified as Antiochus Epiphanes, who invaded Egypt in 170 and again in 168.'^^ This identification would require a very precise date for the passage. The king is said to depart in triumph. This would be appropriate for the first campaign of Antiochus but not for the second. The oracle would have to have been written immediately after the first campaign, before it became apparent that no conversion of Egypt would follow. The identification with Antiochus Epiphanes is not, however, as compelling as has generally been assumed. Taken as a whole, the passage in verses 601-18 is clearly not ex eventu but a real prophecy (which was never fulfilled). A king from Asia was a traditional threat to Egypt (we might compare a "king from the north" in biblical prophecy). The invasion by the Hyksos was recalled by Manetho. More recently, the Persians, Cambyses, and Artaxerxes Ochus were notorious invaders. In Egyptian prophecy, the Potter's Oracle refers to a king who will come down from Syria and be hated by all, and the oracles of Nechepso and Petosiris say that a great man will come from Asia to the land of the Egyptians, capture the ruler of Egypt, subject some of the people, and kill others. It is gratuitous to assume that these oracular passages must refer specifically to Antiochus Epiphanes. The presentation in Sib. Or. 3 is in all probability colored by the invasion of Antiochus Epiphanes as the most recent king from Asia, but the passage cannot be taken as an historical reference. It is part of an eschatological oracle in which any historical reminiscences are used to project the future. 124. "A sword will pass through your midst." Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 274, argues that this is "pure conjecture," but he does not argue that any other interpretation is more plausible. 125. On the significance of the epithet neos, see Collins, Tlie Sibylline Oracles, 30. Both Philometor and Physcon first came to the throne at an early age. The epithet was part of the title of Neos Philopator. Moreover, it was commonly applied to Horus, the divine king. 126. On the invasions, see Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1:119. On the identification of the king from Asia, see Collins, The Sibylline Oracles, 39-40. Momigliano ("La Portata Storica," 1081) accepts the identification with Antiochus.


91

Again, while the passage does not specify the role of the Egyptian king, it does not provide a reference to the Maccabean revolt or its setting.

The Analogy with the Persian Period Two other passages are significant for the political context of Sib. Or. 3. The first concerns the restoration from the Babylonian exile, in verses 286-94. The second is the reference to the "king from the sun" in verse 652. In verses 286-94 we read: And then the heavenly God will send a king and will judge each man in blood and the gleam of fire. There is a certain royal tribe whose race will never stumble. This too, as time pursues its cyclic course, will reign, and it will begin to raise up a new temple of God. All the kings of the Persians will bring to their aid gold and bronze and much-wrought iron. For God Himself will give a holy dream by night and then indeed the temple will again be as it was before. This passage follows directly on the exile, when "for seven decades of times all your fruitful earth and the wonders of the temple will be desolate." The reference to the kings of the Persians makes it clear enough that the reference is to the restoration in the sixth century. Yet a number of scholars have tried to find a messianic reference here.'^^ J. Nolland has argued that the use of the second person in verses 265-85 indicates an address to the present time. Further, the statement that the temple will again be as it was before ill fits the historical restoration of the sixth century, and the judgment "in blood and fire" (v. 287) has eschatological overtones and echoes Joel 3:3 and 4:2. Nolland concludes that the sibyllist is applying the sixth-century restoration to his own day and infers a situation where the temple was profaned. Analogies with Daniel 9 and Jubilees support a date in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes. Nolland then sees the restoration as eschatological and takes the reference to the "royal tribe whose race will never stumble" (vss. 288-89) as a reference to "the whole notion of the inviolability of the Davidlc kingship (2 Sam vii etc.)" — and so to a Davldic messiah. Since such a hope is not easily applied to the Maccabees, he concludes that this oracle was composed "prior to significant Maccabean success . . . before the rise of popular hopes in the Maccabees."'^^

127. Nikiprowetzky, La Troisieme Sibylle, 133-35. See Collins, The Sibylline Oracles. 38-39. 128. J. Nolland, "Sib Or 111.265-94, An Early Maccabean Messianic Oracle," JTS 30 (1979) 158-67.

92


The argument for an appHcation of the oracle to the author's own time is not a necessary one — not all Jews need have thought of the postexilic temple as inadequate. However, it is possible. At least the passage concludes a section of the book and one period of history, and so is functionally parallel to the eschatological oracles. This does not necessarily mean that the book was written at a time when the temple was profaned but that there is a pattern in history — punishment for sin and restoration for the faithful — which will be repeated in the eschatological period. However, if we grant a parallel between the restoration under Cyrus and the author's time and/or the eschatological age, the passage still does not support either the messianic interpretation or the dating proposed by Nolland. The only individual mentioned (vs. 286) is not a Davldide, but Cyrus. If he is meant as a type of an eschatological messiah, he would suggest not a Davidide but a Gentile king (a suggestion supported by other passages in Sib. Or. 3). It is doubtful whether the "certain royal tribe" can be identified as the Davidic house. The more natural interpretation is the Jewish race, which attained a significant measure of selfrule after the exile. ^•^^ Further, even if we suppose with Nolland that the author was awaiting a restoration of the temple (and this supposition is not clearly warranted by the text), the precise dating would not follow. Not all Jews recognized the Maccabean restoration. The lack of support for the Maccabean rebellion here was not necessarily due to an early date. It may have arisen from lack of sympathy with the Maccabees. Since the primary reference in this passage is indisputably to the sixthcentury restoration, inferences for the political context of the eschatological kingdom are only tentative. Insofar as such inferences can be drawn, the passage suggests that the Jewish state and its temple will be established through the mediation of a Gentile monarch like Cyrus. It should, of course, be noted that Cyrus himself never set foot in Palestine. His role in the Jewish restoration was indirect in the sense that he enabled and permitted the Jews to reestablish their own state and rebuild their own temple. This analogy may be significant for the reticence of Sib. Or. 3 on the role of the seventh king in the messianic age.

The King from the Sun The final reference to an individual king is found in verses 652-56: And then God will send a king from the sun (Icai tot'ap' eelioio theos pempsei basilea) who will stop the entire earth from evil war, killing 129. So also H. C. O. Lanchester, in APOT, 2:384.


93

some, imposing oaths of loyaky on others; and he will not do all these things by his private plans but in obedience to the noble teachings of the great God. The king in this passage is not said to act directly on the Jews, although the following verses go on to describe the prosperity of the temple. His role is to put an end to war in the entire world. We may compare the historical role of Cyrus, who is also said to act in accordance with the purpose of God (Isa. 44:28). The expression "from the sun" has given rise to considerable controversy. It has commonly been translated as "from the east" on the analogy of Isa. 41:2, 25 (where the phrases apo anatoldn and aph heliou anatoldn refer to Cyrus), and presumed to refer to a Jewish messiah.'^^ This position is riddled with difficulties. First, the actual phrase Is different: Isaiah specifies the geographical connotation with the word anatoldn}^^ The phrase ap' eelioio does not mean "from the East," but "from the sun." Second, in Isaiah the reference is not to a Jewish messiah but quite clearly to the Persian Cyrus, who did in fact come from the East. Third, despite assertions to the contrary, there is no evidence that a Jewish messiah was ever referred to as a king from the east, or expected from the East. On the contrary, in the Testament of Moses (3:1) the king from the East is the destructive Nebuchadnezzar, and the kings from the east are also destructive in Rev. 16:12,^^^ Fourth, given that the phrase was not a traditional title for a Jewish messiah, it is difficult to see why a Jew in the second century would have expected salvation from a king from the East. The Third Sibyl never indicates interest or hope in the East. On the contrary, the messianic age is always associated with the reign of a king of Egypt.

130. The text is disputed. Nikiprowetzky reads "people." 131. So Momigliano, "La Portata Storica," 1081; Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 27778. 132. This is even more clearly the case in Phlegon, Mirabilia 3.7, adduced as a parallel by H. Schwier, Temple und Tempelzersldrung: Untersuchungen zu den theologischen und ideologischen Faktoren im ersten jUdisch-romischen Krieg (66-74 n. Chr) (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1989) 236-37, 242-43, where the phrase is ex Asies hothen heliou anatolai eisin: "from Asia where the sunrise is." See also A. Chester, "Jewish Messianic Expectations and Mediatorial Figures and Pauline Christology," in M. Hengel and U. Heckel, eds., Paulus und das antike Judenlum (Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1991) 35. 133. Collins, The Sibylline Oracles, 152 n. 29. The famous passage in Tacitus 5.13 ("Many were convinced that it was said in the ancient writings of the priests that at that very time the East would grow strong and men coming from Judea would come to power") is written from a Roman point of view from which Judea was East. Josephus (J.W. 6.5.4 §312) omits the reference to the East in reporting this prophecy. The opposition of East and West, which plays a prominent role in later Sibylline prophecies (Collins, The Sibylline Oracles, chap. 4), has no role in the earliest stratum of the Third Sibyl, but only emerges when Rome becomes the archenemy.

94


The closest parallel that we have to the phrase in Sib. On 3:652 is in fact found in an Egyptian document of the Hellenistic age, the Potter's Oracle: "and then Egypt will increase when the king from the sun, who is benevolent for fifty-five years, becomes present, appointed by the greatest goddess Isis."^^"* In an Egyptian document, the king from the sun has a clear meaning — it refers to the old pharaonic ideology. The Potter's Oracle is explicitly anti-Alexandrian and sees the king from the sun as a native Egyptian who would overthrow the Ptolemies. Momigliano admits the relevance of this text for Sib. Or. 3 but asserts "that the king from the sun is not a Ptolemy in either text."'^^ Presumably, because the phrase does not refer to a Ptolemy in the Potter's Oracle it cannot in Sib. Or. 3 either. But there is ample evidence that the Ptolemies also appropriated the ideology and titles of the pharaohs. Ptolemaic kings are elsewhere said to be "chosen by the sun" and "son of the sun, to whom the sun has given victory."'^^ The phrase "king from the sun" in a document written in Egypt most naturally evokes pharaonic ideology, to which both the Ptolemies and the native Egyptians laid claim. Hellenistic Jewish literature is conspicuously void of sympathy for native Egyptians. At a time when the Palestinian Jews were locked in combat with the Seleucids, it was also natural for Jews, especially those In Egypt, to look to the Ptolemaic line to establish a world situation which would be favorable to Judaism. Despite Momigliano's assertion that the seventh king is not identical with the king from the sun,'^'' the identification is inevitable. Both are Egyptian kings. While the passages which refer to the seventh king do not explicitly say that he will bring about the messianic age, it is surely implied 134. Collins, The Sibylline Oracles, 41; idem, "The Sibyl and the Potter: Political Propaganda in Ptolemaic Egypt," in idem. Seers, Sibyls, and Sages, 199-210. Gruen, The Heritage of Hellenism, 278, apparently misses the point of the latter article, which is primarily a contrast between the oracles of the Sibyl and the Potter The parallel is also noted by J. Bidez and F. Cumont, Les Mages Hellinises (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1938) 2:372, who implausibly see a reference to Mithras; and J. G, Griffiths, "Apocalyptic in the Hellenistic Era," in Hellholm, ed.. Apocalypticism, 290, who puts the references in their proper Egyptian context. 135. Momigliano, "La Portata Storica," 1081-82. Similarly Gruen, The Heritage of Hellenism, 278 and Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 223. 136. Collins, The Sibylline Oracles, 41, and the literature there cited. The pharaonic imagery is acknowledged by Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 278, but he asserts that Sib. Or 3 represents a "Jewish adaptation of Egyptian lore to forecast a Messiah." He cannot, however, cite a single parallel for Jewish messianic use of Egyptian imagery, or any other hint of a Jewish messiah in Sib. OK 3. His reference to D. Frankfurter, Elijah in Upper Egypt (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993) 176-82, is misleading. Frankfurter has a good discussion of Egyptian eschatological prophecy, but he in no way supports the messianic interpretation of Sib. Or 3. 137. Momigliano, "La Portata Storica." 1081. 138. So also 0 . Camponovo, Konigtum, Kdnigsherrschaft, und Reich Gottes in den FruhjUdischen Schriften (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1984) 344; Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature, 164; J. Bartlett, Jews in the Hellenistic World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985) 38; pace Gruen, The Heritage of Hellenism, 211, who fails to provide any explanation of the recurring references to the seventh king.


95

that he will have something to do with it. In fact, the king from the sun is not directly said to bring about the messianic age either, but only to bring about the universal peace which is its precondition. The statements about the two are perfectly compatible, and there is no reference to any other individual king in the eschatological transformation.

Jerusalem and the Gentile Kings Two final passages require a brief mention. Verses 657-68 describe how "the kings of the peoples" will be moved to envy against "the temple of the great God." The motif of the opulence of the temple and envy of the kings is reminiscent of the story of Heliodorus in 2 Maccabees 3. Yet the whole scene is evidently eschatological and has its biblical prototype in Psalms 2 and 48. The experience of the Maccabean era may have helped shape this scenario, but the reference is to a future eschatological attack. However, in verses 732-40 we have a clear address to the author's own situation: "But wretched Greece, desist from proud thoughts. Do not send against this city your planless people which is not from the holy land of the Great One." The Greeks who in fact sent armies against Jerusalem in this period were the Seleucids, and it is to them that the admonition Is most directly addressed, but it could also apply to the Ptolemies or to anyone else if they sent forces against Jerusalem. The author does not expect or want the seventh king of Egypt to intervene in the internal affairs of Judea. He does not call on any Greek force either to assist or to oppose the Maccabees. The king from the sun should establish universal peace. Then, when the "sons of the great God" are allowed to "live peacefully around the temple" (vss. 702-3), God himself will shield them (vs. 705) and "the hand of the Holy One will be fighting for them" (vss. 708-9).

A Ptolemaic Messiah It appears, then, that Sib. Or. 3 looks for a Ptolemaic messiah in the same sense that Second Isaiah looks for a Persian one. In neither case is there any acceptance of a pagan religion. Rather, both look for the conversion of Gentiles to Judaism. While the sibyl is definitely open to Gentile conversion, she chides the Gentiles, and especially Gentile kings, quite severely, just as Second Isaiah does. The Ptolemaic king, hke Cyrus, has a crucial role to play but is ultimately at the service of Judaism in the designs of God. We will return to the sibyl's ethical and religious conception of Judaism in Part Two below. For the present we must underline the political dimension

96


of Jewish identity. The hopes of the sibyl are still directed toward Jerusalem but do not require the political independence of Judea. It is sufficient that a favorable international order be provided by a Gentile king.^^^ Ultimately, too. Gentiles as well as Jews will bring their gifts to the temple of Jerusalem.

The Provenance of Sibylline Oracle 3 What circles in Judaism would have produced such a document? It combines an insistence on the Jewish law, which we will examine in Chapter 4 below, and a strong insistence on the temple cult with hope in a Ptolemaic messiah and the ultimate conversion of the Gentiles. Prior to the Maccabean revolt such attitudes could plausibly be attributed to Onias III, the last high priest of the legitimate line of succession.^"^^ 2 Maccabees depicts him as a man of great piety, especially devoted to the temple cult as befitted a high priest. The high priests were inevitably political figures, and Judean politics was heavily influenced by the rival claims of the Ptolemies and the Seleucids. The father of Onias III, Simon the Just, was a supporter of the Seleucids, but Onias himself inclined to the Ptolemies, as may be inferred from the deposit of funds in the temple by the pro-Ptolemaic Hyrcanus, the Tobiad, and Onias's displacement by Antiochus Epiphanes.''*^ After the revolt his son Onias IV sought refuge in Egypt, attained military distinction in the service of Philometor, and founded the temple at Leontopolis. I have suggested in previous publications that the Third Sibyl originated in circles associated with the younger O n i a s . W h i l e this proposal is necessarily hypothetical, I believe that it remains plausible. It also explains why the Maccabean rebellion is passed over in silence. Onias was evidently no supporter of the Maccabees. Yet he never actively opposed them either, and his sons actually interceded with Cleopatra III in defense of Alexander Jannaeus.'** Rather than engage in in139. This attitude is, in fact, typical of much of Second Temple Judaism. It is also exemplified in Daniel 2-6. See J. J. Collins, "Nebuchadnezzar and the Kingdom of God," in idem. Seers, Sibyls, and Sages, 131-37. 140. V. Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization, 156. 141. Josephus (J.W. 1.1.1 §§31-33) claims that the outbreak of hostilities which led to the Maccabean revolt was directly related to the struggle between the Seleucids and the Ptolemies for Palestine and that Onias was on the Ptolemaic side. Unfortunately, Josephus's entire account is confused. 142. Collins, Tlie Sibylline Oracles, 52-53; idem, "The Provenance of the Third Sibylline Oracle," Bulletin of the Institute of Jewish Studies 2 (1974) 1-18. 143. Cf Doran, Temple Propaganda, 11-12; Parente, "Onias III," 87; Merkel, Sibyllinen, 1064. The "qualifications and reservations" of A. Chester, "The Sibyl and the Temple," in W. Horbury, ed., Templum Amicitiae: Essays on the Second Temple presented to Ernst Bammel (JSOTSup 48; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1991) 39-43, are quite reasonable and serve to underline that the proposal is hypothetical. 144. Ant. 13.13.2 §354; Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization, 283.


97

ner-Jewish polemics, which could only impress a Gentile audience negatively, the sibyl simply ignores the Maccabees. Oniad provenance may seem implausible in view of the sibyl's strong insistence on the Jerusalem temple.'*^ Yet we have seen that there is little evidence of schismatic intentions on the part of Onias. His fellow Zadokites at Qumran retained their hope for an eschatological restoration of the Jerusalem temple, even while they deemed it defiled in the present. It is likely that the followers of Onias also dreamed of restoration of the traditional Jerusalem cult. The text, however, stops well short of indicating the specific circles in which it was written. We cannot insist on attribution to the circles of Onias, or any other circles. We can, however, insist that the sibyllist saw the Ptolemaic king as playing an important role in the achievement of Jewish political goals. In this respect, the sibyl is not atypical of Diaspora Judaism, whose political well-being always depended on the goodwill of the Gentile rulers.

The Letter of Aristeas Our view of the political stance of Diaspora Judaism after the Maccabean revolt can be filled out from a few documents which are not primarily historical or political in nature. The so-called Letter of Aristeas to Philocrates^^^ is one of the best-known compositions of Hellenistic Judaism.'*'' It has been studied mainly in connection with the problem of the origins of the Septuagint. Much of the interest of the work lies in its understanding of the Torah, which is its primary expression of Judaism and which will be discussed in Part Two below. The Letter of Aristeas is also significant, however, for the light it throws on the relations of Diaspora Judaism both with the Ptolemies and with Jerusalem. 145. The temple is not explicitly identified as that of Jerusalem, but the identification can hardly be doubted. See Chester. "The Sibyl and the Temple," 37-69. 146. M. Hadas {Aristeas to Philocrates [Dropsie College Edition; New York: Harper. 1951] 56-59) has pointed out that the work is not a letter, h\H a diegesis, a genre defined by the rhetorician Theon as "a discourse expository of things which happened or might have happened." By the canons of ancient rhetoric, the work of Pseudo-Aristeas could be considered a plasma or "an imaginative treatment of history," which should, however, preserve historical verisimilitude and present a higher "poetical" truth. 147. In addition to Hadas's useful edition, which is cited here, see the commentaries of R. Tramontano, La lettera di Aristeo (Naples: Ufficio Succursale della CiviM Cattolica, 1931); H, G. Meecham, The Letter of Aristeas (Manchester: Manchester University, 1935); A. Pelletier. La Lettre d'Aristee a Philocrate (SC 89; Paris: Cerf, 1962); and N. Meisner, Aristeasbrief {SSHKL 2.1; Gtitersloh: Mohn, 1973); and also Meisner's two-volume dissertation Untersuchungen zum Aristeasbrief (Berlin: Kirchhche Hochschule, 1973). An English translation can be found in R. J. H, Shutt, "Letter of Aristeas," in OTP, 2:7-34.

98


The date of Pseudo-Aristeas is set in the reign of Ptolemy II Philadelphus (283-246 B.C.E.), but this is universally recognized as a fiction.'*^ Among the more conspicuous "giveaways" are: (1) the claim that Demetrius of Phalerum was in charge of the Alexandrian library under Philadelphus (he was never librarian, and he was banished from Alexandria by Philadelphus for supporting Ptolemy Geraunus instead of Philadelphus as successor of Ptolemy I Soter); (2) the introduction of the philosopher Menedemus of Eretria (201) who had died about 287 B.C.E.; and (3) the statement that "these kings used to administer all their business through decrees and with great precaution" (28). Philadelphus had only one predecessor. The termini post and ante were established by Bickerman at 160 and 125 B.C.E. (approximately) on the basis of the salutations and other linguistic u s a g e . H e argued that the terminus post quern could be lowered to 145 by the geographical allusions, yielding a date in the reign of Ptolemy VIII Euergetes II (Physcon). The latter argument rests on the interpretation of the "some parts, those in Samaria so-called" of section 107 as the districts of Lydda, Aphairema, and Ramathain, which came under Judean control in 145 B . C . E . O n the basis of the same passage, Momigliano argued that the Letter depended on I Maccabees and proposed a date about 110 B . C . E . T h e majority view favors a date in the second half of the second century B.C.E., but there is still no consensus. Arguments for an earlier date have been based in part on the alleged dependence of Aristobulus on Pseudo-Aristeas for the story of the translation of the S e p t u a g i n t . H o w e v e r , the actual story of the translation, while it frames the work of Pseudo-Aristeas, occupies only a small part of the work and would seem to be derived from tradition rather than the fresh composi148. For a concise review of the objections to the purported date, see Hadas, Aristeas, 59. The classic demonstration was made by Humphrey Hody in 1685. 149. E. J. Bickerman, "Zur Datierung des Pseudo-Aristeas," in idem. Studies in Jewish and Christian Histoiy, 1; 108-36, esp. 128 (first published in ZNW 29 [1930]). On the hnguistic evidence, see further Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 2:910-1 \. 150. Bickerman, "Zur Datierung," 128-32. See 1 Mace. 10:30, 38; 11:28, 34 for the acquisition of these territories from Samaria. Bickerman's identification is endorsed as "the only possible one" by Bar-Kochva, Pseudo-Hecataeus, 282-83. 151. A Momigliano, "Per la data e la caratteristica della lettera di Aristea," A e g y / J t o 12 (1932) 161-73 (= Quarto Contributo [1969] 213-24). 152. See Goodman, in Schurer, The History of the Jewish People, 3.1:681-84. 153. Bar-Kochva, Pseudo-Hecataeus, 287-88. A pre-Maccabean date was endorsed by Schurer, Tramontano, Vincent, Wellhausen, Pelletier, and Orlinsky. See S. Jellicoe, The Septuagint and Modern Study (Oxford: Clarendon, 1968) 48-49, with a summary of Orlinsky's arguments in his review of Hadas in the Crozer Quarterly 29 (April 1952) 201-5. Orlinsky notes, but does not commit himself to, the possible dependence of Aristobulus on Pseudo-Aristeas. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1:696, uses the supposed relation to Aristobulus as an argument for a date about 160 B . C . E . Shutt, "Letter of Aristeas," in 077^ 2:9, follows Jellicoe and Orlinsky and puts the date about 170 B . C . E .


99

tion of the author.'^'* We shall see below in Part Two that the other parallels between the two works favor the priority of Aristobulus. The lack of any explicit reference to the Maccabean revolt raises the complex problem of the attitude of Pseudo-Aristeas to the Maccabees but does not require a preMaccabean date.'^^ Considerations which might support a date under Philometor are indecisive. Ptolemy's letter to Eleazar says that "when he (Ptolemy I) judged their chief men to be loyal, he gave them fortresses which he built" (36). The best-known endowment of a Jewish leader in Egypt was the grant of Leontopolis to Onias by Philometor, but there were already Jewish garrisons in Egypt in the third century B . C . E . T h e further claim in the letter, that some Jews were elevated to offices of state (37), points less ambiguously to the reign of Philometor or later.'^^ A date under Philometor is supported by Fraser because of the author's "use, in the correct context, of the technical language of the Ptolemaic court and administration, which is parallel to his knowledge of court protocol, and reveals an intimate knowledge of the whole administrative system."'^^ Fraser concludes that the author was "a Jew of high rank at the Ptolemaic Court, and no member of that house was more likely to elevate a Jew than Philometor."'^^ All this is true, but a Jew who acquired his experience at court under Philometor could still have written under Physcon, or continued in the service of Queen Cleopatra when she was reconciled with Physcon and became his co-ruler. A possible indication of the author's date may be found in the attention given at the beginning of the work to the question of the liberation of Jewish slaves. The incident is evidently fictional and is designed to illustrate the generosity of the Ptolemy. Yet it has the peculiar disadvantage of drawing attention to the fact (if fact it was) that the Ptolemaic house had held Jews in slavery.'^'* The prominence which is quite unnecessarily given to this incident suggests that the author had some reason to illustrate Ptolemaic generosity especially in the form of clemency to the Jews. Now we know from 154. So also Meisner, Aristeasbrief. 39; M. Hengel, "Anonymitat, Pseudepigraphie und 'Literarische Falschung' in der jiidisch-hellenistischen Literatur," Entretiens sur t'Antiquity Classique XVIII (1972) 298. 155. Much of Orlinsky's argument centers on the silence of the letter on Leontopolis and the Jewish struggle against Syria. 156. A. Kasher, "Three Jewish Communities of Lower Egypt in the Ptolemaic Period," Scripta Classica Israelica 2 (1975) 113-23; idem, "First Jewish Military Units in Ptolemaic Egypt," JSJ 9 (1978) 57-67; idem, Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt. 106-67. The word pro-ontas ("leaders") could also be translated "those who were there before." 157. But here again we must remember the case of Dositheus son of Drimylus! 158. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1:703. 159. Ibid., 1:699. 160. Tcherikover {Hellenistic Civilization, 273) finds "no grounds for doubting the historical trustworthiness of this tale" except for the inflated number of 100,000.

100


Josephus that after the death of Philometor the Jews from the land of Onias continued to support his widow Cleopatra II against Physcon.'^' Since Physcon triumphed, the Jews were in a difficult situation. Josephus makes this the occasion for the legendary story of an attempted persecution of the Jews, which appears in a different form in 3 Maccabees. Tcherikover has argued that the story may well reflect, in an exaggerated way, historical events in the time of Physcon.'^^ physcon would naturally have considered some reprisals against the Jews, and the danger, or some actual persecution, may be reflected in the legendary account of 3 Maccabees. The entire reign of Physcon was extremely turbulent, but there were periods of reconciliation with Cleopatra, and finally, in 118, a decree of amnesty was i s s u e d . W e have no clear documentation of the fortunes of the Jews during this period, but two dedications of synagogues "on behalf of the king" survive from the reign of Physcon,'^* and the sons of Onias survived to play a prominent role under Cleopatra III.'^^ It would seem that Jewish life in Egypt was not disrupted in any lasting way. The account of the liberation of slaves in Pseudo-Aristeas may have been designed as a subtle appeal to the king by praising the clemency of his ancestor, or it may have been designed to reassure Jews of the basic goodwill of the monarchy and suggest that the threat to the Jews was due either to the greed of soldiers (14) or to the impulses of the mob (37). Two other items in the Letter might be illuminated by this context. In 166-67 the high priest singles out informers (emphanistae) for special condemnation and praises the king for putting such people to d e a t h . D i o d o r u s 33.6 reports that Physcon exiled many people and seized their property on the false allegations of sycophants.'^^ Pseudo-Aristeas may be subtly suggesting how such informers should be treated. In 148 the high priest interprets some of the dietary laws as symbols "that they may be just and achieve nothing by violence, nor confiding in their own strength oppress others." This statement

\6\.Ag. Ap. 2.51-56. 162. Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization, 274-75; idem, "The Third Book of Maccabees," 1-26. 163. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1:119-23. Physcon married Cleopatra II after his return to Egypt in 145 and bore him a son, whom he later murdered. However, he later married her daughter Cleopatra III, without divorcing her mother He was expelled from Alexandria in 131 B . C . E . by "a rising of the population, supported or sponsored by Cleopatra II," but he returned in 127. He was reconciled with Cleopatra II in 124 and reigned with both queens until his death in 116 B . C . E . 164. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 2:215 n. 232; CPJ, 1:23 n. 8. 165. Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization, 283. Josephus (Ant. 13.10.4 [287]), citing Strabo, says that they "were held in very high esteem by the queen." 166. This passage has been used as a basis for dating the work to the time of Tiberius, assuming a reference to the Roman delatores put to death in 33 C . E . See Hadas, Aristeas, 15. 167. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 2:215 n. 232.


101

would seem to distance the Judaism of Pseudo-Aristeas from the military followers of Onias, on the one hand, and from the Hasmoneans on the other, and to advocate a nonmilitant stance which would be inoffensive to Physcon. By contrast, the prominence of Jews under Philometor was due in no small part to their military activities. In view of these considerations, Bickerman's dating to the time of Physcon would seem to be most probable. Pseudo-Aristeas makes no reference to Leontopolis, but scholars have inevitably speculated on his implicit attitude to the temple of Onias. So Jellicoe has proposed that Pseudo-Aristeas's endorsement of the Septuagint translation which originated in Jerusalem was intended to counter an otherwise unknown translation from L e o n t o p o l i s . M e i s n e r has accepted this proposal and further suggested that Pseudo-Aristeas is polemicizing against the Leontopolis settlement for its military role against Physcon.'''*' However, Pseudo-Aristeas shows little sign of a polemic against Leontopolis. While it presents an idealized picture of Jerusalem, it is supposed to be a pre-Maccabean Jerusalem, presided over by a high priest who was an ancestor of O n i a s . T h e references in Ptolemy's letter to Jews who were given fortresses and exalted to offices of state presume that these things are for the glory of Judaism. There is no evidence whatever that Leontopolis had its own translation of the Torah or that there is any polemic in this regard. This is not to say that Pseudo-Aristeas was proLeontopolis. The claim that Judaism is nonviolent fits as ill with the aspirations of a military colony as it does with the policies of the Hasmoneans. Pseudo-Aristeas distances himself from the military colony without thereby carrying out any polemic against it. Again, the attitude of the Letter to Jerusalem is by no means clear-cut. The manner of the description of the cult and city has been taken to suggest that Pseudo-Aristeas had visited Jerusalem as a p i l g r i m . T h i s is far from certain. The description of Jerusalem is based on biblical sources,'''^ and some of the details, such as the alleged flooding of the Jordan (section 116), 168. Recently Bar-Kochva, Pseudo-Hecataeus, 271-88, has argued for a date between 118 and 113 B . C . E . , near the end of Physcon's reign or shortly after his death. The description of Jerusalem favors a period of Jewish independence. Bar-Kochva opts for the middle period of the reign of John Hyrcanus. 169. S. Jellicoe, "The Occasion and Purpose of the Letter of Aristeas: A Reexamination," NTS 12 (1965-66) 144-50; idem. The Septuagint and Modern Study, 50. 170. Meisner, Aristeasbrief, 43. He also dates Pseudo-Aristeas to the reign of Physcon but specifies the later period of his reign. 171. It is noteworthy that the Greek translation of Sirach 50:24 omits the Hebrew verse which ascribes to Simon's house the eternal priesthood promised to Phineas (Bickerman, "Zur Datierung," 132). There is no such evidence of polemic here. 172. Hadas, Aristeas, 6, 136-37. 173. V. Tcherikover, "The Ideology of the Letter of Aristeas," HTR 51 (1958) 77-79; Hadas, Aristeas, 64.

102


suggest an ignorance of the actual conditions of the land.'-'* Pseudo-Aristeas never claims that it was customary for Diaspora Jews to visit Jerusalem on pilgrimage, although such a statement could have fitted in very well with his narrative. The bold assertions that Ptolemy's prodigious gifts were deposited in the temple could hardly withstand the possibility that some of his readers would actually check.'''^ In all, the description of Jerusalem is of a Utopian, rather fantastic and remote city, not one with which the author or his readers had any great personal familiarity.'^^ Jerusalem and its cult are brought in to embellish the portrayal of Judaism. It is important for the author that Diaspora Judaism has an illustrious source. It does not follow that Jewish life in the Diaspora is in any sense directed from or towards Jerusalem.'^^ A similar point must be made on the entire issue of the translation of the Torah. As we have seen, Pseudo-Aristeas regards the Torah as indispensable. It is also true that he tells of an official translation made by duly appointed authorities from Jerusalem. The purpose of this account has given rise to endless debate. Much of it has centered on the memorandum of Demetrius to the king in 29-32, which says that the books of the law of the Jews "are written in Hebrew characters and in the Hebrew tongue, and they have been committed to writing somewhat carelessly and not adequately, according to the testimony of experts, for they have never benefited from a king's forethought." Despite the contentions of Kahle,'^^ it is now widely agreed that this passage does not refer to pre-Septuagint Greek translations but to inadequate copies of the Hebrew text.'^^ We may assume with Gooding'^*' that the texts in question are those available in Alexandria. If there were no adequate Hebrew text, there could be no translation. However, the net effect is to say that the Greek translation is more reliable than the Hebrew available in Alexandria. Further, it is formally canonized by the acclaim of the people and so established as a self-sufficient biblical text.'^' 174. The assertion is based on Josh. 3:15 but is explicitly offered as a parallel to the Nile. 175. One could perhaps suppose that these objects had been pillaged by Antiochus Epiphanes, but the Letter contains no hint that would prepare for such an assumption. 176. Hadas {Aristeas, 64): "All references to that country in Aristeas envisage a remote and ideahzed Biblical Palestine and seem purposely to ignore contemporary reality." 177. Tcherikover, "Ideology," 83. See also D. Schwartz, "Temple or City: What Did Hellenistic Jews See in Jerusalem?" in M. Poorthuis and C. Safrai, eds.. The Centrality ofJerusalem: Historical Perspectives {Kampen: Kok Pharos, 1996) 114-27; J. A. Goldstein, "The Message of Aristeas to Philocrates," in M. Mor, ed., Eretz Israel, Israel and the Jewish Diaspora: Mutual Relations (Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1991) 1-23. 178. Jellicoe, The Septuagint and Modern Study, 59-63. 179. H. M. Orhnsky, "The Septuagint as Holy Writ and the Philosophy of the Translators," HUCA 46 (1975) 92 n. 4; D. W. Gooding, "Aristeas and Septuagint Origins: A Review of Recent Studies," VT 13 (1963) 158-80. 180. Gooding, "Aristeas and Septuagint Origins," 165-74. 181. Orlinsky, "The Septuagint as Holy Writ," 94-103.


103

Pseudo-Aristeas is not polemicizing against any other Greek translation, but is proclaiming the adequacy of the Septuagint over against the HebrewJ^^ (In fact, in at least one case, the table of pure gold in 57, PseudoAristeas follows the Septuagint against the Hebrew.) There is no reason for Egyptian Jewry to rely on the Hebrew text or to correct their translations on the basis of the Hebrew.'^* Tcherikover has suggested that the disavowal of "a crude and uncouth disposition" (122) is a polemic against the literaUsm (and Hebraism) especially characteristic of Palestinian Jews.'^^ The Letter as a whole is not characterized by any polemic against Judea, but it does not present a view of Judaism centered on Jerusalem either. It is rather a manifesto of the self-sufficiency of Diaspora Judaism, which respects Jerusalem as its source, but speaks of an idealized biblical Judea rather than of the actual state of the Hasmoneans. Its lack of reference to Leontopolis is most easily explained by the character of that establishment. It never was a rival to Jerusalem, or intended as a center for all Egyptian Jews, but only a chapel for the land of Onias. Pseudo-Aristeas would have respected Onias insofar as he added to the glory of the Jews but was careful to distance himself from his military policies. The Judaism of Pseudo-Aristeas seeks a cautious political course. It reassures Gentiles of its loyalty to the Ptolemaic house. It seeks to confirm Jews in that loyalty. As Gruen has noted, "the emphasis again and again is on Ptolemaic patronage, the king bestowing favors that elicit friendship and devotion."'^^ Judaism is not defined in national terms. The law is the vehicle of a philosophy which is potentially universal.'^'' Accordingly, we will defer our main discussion of the view of Judaism in Pseudo-Aristeas to Part Two, where we discuss philosophical Judaism.

Joseph and Aseneth Some further light may be shed on political relations and attitudes in the Ptolemaic era by the novella Joseph and Aseneth, a document that will occupy us further in Chapter 6 below. In this case, date and provenance are 182. So also Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 213. 183. Hadas, Ansf^fls, 122-23. 184. Hengel ("Anonymitat," 300-301) suggests a possible polemic against Palestinian revisions of the LXX, such as the later ones of Aquila and Theodotion. 185. Tcherikover, "Ideology," 67-68. AlsoG. Howard, "The Letter of Aristeas and Diaspora Judaism," JTS 22 (1971) 337-48. 186. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism. 214. 187. Tcherikover ("Ideology," 71): "Judaism is a combination of a universal philosophy with the idea of monotheism."

104


quite uncertain, and the textual history is disputed. The current consensus favors the longer recension of the work reconstructed by Christoph Burchard over the shorter one edited by Marc Philonenko.'^^ Plausible arguments have recently been advanced for the priority of the shorter recension by Ross Kraemer and Angela Standhartinger,'^^ but their case has not been worked through for the whole text. We will follow Burchard's text here, while recognizing that the issue has not been finally resolved. The first editor, Pierre Batiffol, regarded the work as Christian,'^*' and he was followed in this judgment by E. W. Brooks, who did the English translation, among others.'^' The Jewish origin of the work was defended already in the review of Batiffol by L. Duchesne,'^^ and at length by P. Riessler in ^922.193 Since the articles of Kilpatrick, Jeremias, and Kuhn in the 1950s, the Jewish provenance has been generally accepted.'^* The case for Christian authorship has been taken up again recently by Ross Kraemer. '^^ The essential argument for Jewish authorship is twofold. First, the central episode involving the marriage of Joseph to an Egyptian woman, Aseneth, concerns a quintessentially Jewish problem. While it is apparent that the story was nonetheless transmitted by Christians,'^^ this story still seems far more likely to have been composed in a Jewish context. Second, there is no unambiguous indication of

188. For the textual witnesses, see C. Burchard, "Joseph and Aseneth," in OTP, 2:17880.1 assume here the priority of the long recension, championed by Burchard. See his preliminary edition, "Ein vorlaufiger griechischer Text von Joseph und Aseneth," Dielheimer Blatter zum Alten Testament 14 (1979) 2-53. See also Burchard's treatment in Joseph und Aseneth (JSHRZ 2.4; Gutersloh: Mohn, 1983). The edition of M. Philonenko, Joseph et Aseneth: Introduction, Texte Critique et Notes (Studia Posl-Biblica 13; Leiden: Brill, 1968) is based on the short recension. 189. R. S. Kraemer, When Aseneth Met Joseph: A Late Antique Tale of the Biblical Patriarch and His Egyptian Wife, Reconsidered (New York: Oxford, 1998) 50-88; A. Standhartinger, Das Frauenbild im Judentum der hellenistischen Zeit: Ein Beitrag anhand von 'Joseph & Aj^rt^r/i'(Leiden: Brill, 1995) 219-55. 190. P. Battifol, "Le Livre de la Prifere d'Aseneth," Studia Patristica: Etudes d'ancietme litterature chretienne (Paris: Leroux, 1889-90) 1-115. 191. E. W. Brooks, Joseph and Asenath: The Confession and Prayer of Asenath Daughter of Pentephres the Priest (London: SPCK, 1918). For a list of scholars espousing Christian or Jewish authorship, see C. Burchard, Untersuchungen zu Joseph und Asenath (WUNT 8; Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1965) 99. 192. Bulletin critique 10 (1989) 461-66. 193. P. Riessler, "Joseph und Aseneth: Eine altjiidische Erzahlung," Theologische Quartalschrift 103 (1922) 1-22; 145-83. 194. G. D. Kilpatrick, "The Last Supper," ET 64 (1952/53) 4-8; K. G. Kuhn, "The Lord's Supper and the Communal Meal at Qumran," in K. Stendahl, ed.. The Scrolls and the New Testament (New York: Harper, 1957) 65-93; J. Jeremias, "The Last Supper," £r64 (1952/ 53) 91-92. For a history of research, see R. Chesnutt, Frotn Death to Life: Conversion in Joseph and Aseneth (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995) 20-64. 195. Kraemer, When Aseneth Met Joseph. 196. Kraemer, When Aseneth Met Joseph. 247. She admits that Christians may have been interested in the story for secondary reasons.


105

Christian authorship. While it is not impossible that a Christian author would eoneeal his or her identity, the great bulk of Christian writings, including pseudepigrapha, are not reticent about their faith. There are, to be sure, parallels to Christian writings and motifs in Joseph and Aseneth. One of the most puzzling features of the book is the formulaic reference to eating the bread of life, drinking the cup of immortality, and anointing with the oil of incorruption (8:5; 15:4; 16:16; cf. 19:5; 21:21). Moreover, an angel gives Aseneth a piece of a honeycomb to eat and tells her that "this is a comb of life, and everyone who eats of it will not die for ever (and) ever" (16:8). These passages inevitably bring to mind the Christian Eucharist (cf. John 6:51), but the element of anointing is puzzling, and there is no overt reference to Christ. While it is possible that some Christian language was introduced into the story in the course of its long and complicated textual transmission (e.g., the statement about the comb of life in 16:8),'^'' it is hard to believe that a Christian author would not have given clearer indications of his or her faith.'^^ Linguistic dependence on the Septuagint, including the prophets, and on some apocryphal writings, makes a date before the first century B.C.E. unl i k e l y . T h i s terminus a quo is also supported by the general linguistic character of the book, which has several words attested only in the New Testament and later.•^^'^ Most scholars accept Egypt as the place of composition, in view of the Egyptian setting of the entire story, the polemic against specifically Egyptian idolatry, and the Egyptian coloring of some of the symboli s m . W h i l e these considerations may not amount to proof, they do establish a considerable weight of probability. There is little to support any other place of origin for Joseph and Aseneth?^^ If the work is a product of Egyptian Judaism, then a date before the disastrous Diaspora revolt of 115-18 C.E. 197. T. Holtz, "Christiiche Interpolationen in 'Joseph und Aseneth,'" NTS 14 (1967/8) 482-97. 198. Chesnutt, From Death to Life, 74; cf. Philonenko, Joseph et Aseneth, 101; Burchard, "Joseph and Aseneth," 187; Goodman, in Schiirer, The History of the Jewish People, 3.1:549; Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 92. For the possibihty of female authorship, see R. S. Kraeiner, "Women's Authorship of Jewish and Christian Literature in the Greco-Roman," in A.-J. Levine, ed., " 'Women Like This': New Perspectives on Jewish Women in the Greco-Roman World (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1991) 234-36; Standhartinger, Das Frauenbild, 225-37. 199. Burchard, Untersuchungen zu Joseph und Aseneth, 144; Philonenko, Joseph et Aseneth, 27-32; G. Delling, "Einwirkungen der Septuaginta in 'Joseph und Aseneth,'" JSJ 9 (1978) 29-56. 200. Philonenko, Joseph et Aseneth, 29. 201. Goodman, in Schurer, The History of the Jewish People, 3.1:548. Philonenko, Joseph et Aseneth, 61-78, makes much of alleged points of contact between Aseneth and the goddess Neith, but see the critique of D. Sanger, "Bekehrung und Exodus: Zum jiidischen Traditionshintergrund von 'Joseph und Aseneth,'" JSJ 10 (1979) 11-36. 202. See Chesnutt, From Death to Life, 78-79. Egyptian provenance is questioned by Standhartinger, Das Frauenbild, 14-16 and Kraemer, When Aseneth Met Joseph, 286-93. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 93, says that the narrative setting "suggests but by no means proves an Egyptian provenance."

106


is almost certain. Kraemer has argued strongly for a later (third or fourth century C.E.) dating, mainly because of the lack of early attestation.Parallels for numerous motifs can be found in either period. Jews used the Greek language in many areas in late antiquity, and so it is not impossible that such a work could be composed by a Jew in the third or fourth century. But in fact there is scarcely any evidence of Jewish literature in Greek in that period, and the great bulk of the Jewish writings taken over by Christianity were composed no later than the early second century C.E. It is most likely, then, that Joseph and Aseneth was composed some time between the end of the second century B.C.E. and the beginning of the second century C.E., even if the arguments do not amount to conclusive proof. Within these limits, more specific indications of date and provenance are hard to find. The lack of any reference to proselyte baptism is of no significance, since there is no clear allusion to proselyte baptism anywhere in Hellenistic Jewish literature. Claims that the practice was known before the rise of Christianity are unsupported.^^* Parallels with the Gospel of John and the letters of Ignatius are equally inconsequential.^*"^ Some of the parallels may be due to secondary Christian alterations, and in any case parallels can also be found in Philo for some of the same motifs. The development of the Greek novel Is too uncertain to shed any light on the issue. Some scholars reject all attempts to infer a date from the text, because of its novelistic genre.^^^ Yet as Randall Chesnutt has pointed out, a network of social tensions pervades the narrative, and we must reckon with the possibility that these tensions reflect the author's context.^**^ These tensions do not necessarily point to a specific date, but they are instructive for the political aspects of Jewish identity in Joseph and Aseneth. 203. Kraemer, When Aseneth Met Joseph, 225-44. 204. G. Delling {Die Taufe iin Neuen Testament [Berlin: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1963] 30-38), contra J. Jeremias {Die Kindertaufe in den ersten vier Jahrhunderten [Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1958] 29-34). Jeremias takes T. Levi 14:6 as the earliest allusion to proselyte baptism (Levi's sons will marry Gentile women and purify them with an unlawful purification), but it is far from evident that the "unlawful purification" is a polemical reference to proselyte baptism. Sib. OK 4:165, which is frequently adduced as an example, must be distinguished from proselyte baptism because of its eschatological setting. Proselyte baptism is not attested in Philo or Josephus, and there is no indication that it was current in the Diaspora before the end of the first century C , E , 205. Philonenko, Joseph et Aseneth, 109, dates Joseph and Aseneth to the early second century C . E . on the basis of these parallels, 206. Standhartinger, Das Frauenbild, 19; cf. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 93-94. On the novelistic genre, see S. West, "Joseph and Asenath: A Neglected Greek Novel," Classical Quarterly 68 (1974) 70-81; R. Pervo, "Joseph and Aseneth and the Greek Novel," in G. MacRae, ed., SBL 1976 Seminar Papers (Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1976) 171-81; Wills, The Jewish Novel, 170-84. 207. R. Chesnutt, "The Setting and Purpose of Joseph and Aseneth," JSP 2 (1988) 22. Chesnutt provides a good review of the various proposals on dating in From Death to Life, 8085


107

A highly specific date and provenance have recently been proposed by Gideon Bohak.•^''^ He finds the key to the provenance in the enigmatic scene where an angel appears to Aseneth and gives her to eat from a honeycomb (chaps. 14-17). In 16:17-23 we read of a swarm of bees that come out of the cells of the honeycomb. They are white as snow, with wings like purple, violet, and scarlet, and like gold-woven linen garments; they have golden diadems on their heads, and have sharp stings, although they harm no one. They encircle Aseneth and make a honeycomb on her mouth, and they eat from the comb. When the man tells them to go away to their place, they fly away to heaven. The bees that want to injure Aseneth die, but the man tells them too to rise and go to their place, and they rise and seek shelter on fruit-bearing trees near Aseneth's house. Bohak notes that the description of the bees mentions the same materials that are used for priestly garments in the Pentateuch. So, for example, in Exod. 28:4-5, Aaron and his sons wear gold, violet, purple, scarlet, and linen. Bohak infers that the bees must represent Jewish priests, and the honeycomb their temple. He then interprets the description of bees leaving one honeycomb and building another as Jewish priests leaving their temple and building another. The identity of these priests is secured by the fact that Aseneth is said to reside in Heliopolis, the very region where Onias built his temple.^"^^ The fact that Aseneth Is said to become a "city of refuge" in which many nations take refuge (15:7) can then be taken as an allusion to Leontopolis, and to the hope that it would be the fulfillment of Isaiah's prophecy, that there would be an altar for the Lord in the land of Egypt, and that the Egyptians would know the Lord (Isa. 19:18-22).^"* Further support for the hypothesis is derived from the very positive portrayal of Levi in chapters 22-29. Bohak even suggests that Levi was the author's alter ego.^^^ He accordingly dates the composition of the narrative to the mid-second century B.C.E., sometime between 160 and 145 B.C.E. This ingenious proposal is intriguing in many respects, especially in view of the undeniable association with Heliopolis and the prominence of the priest Levi in an episode that has no biblical basis. It has the virtue of making sense of an episode that has puzzled all previous commentators. Nonetheless, the allegory of the bees is so subtle that we must wonder whether the author intended it or whether anyone would have perceived it. It is unsafe, then, to base an interpretation of Joseph and Aseneth on the 208. G. Bohak, Joseph and Aseneth and the Jewish Temple in Heliopolis (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1996). 209. Ibid., 13. 210. Ibid.. 79. Bohak also suggests that the burning of the first honeycomb reflects a hope or expectation that the Jerusalem temple would be destroyed. 211. Ibid., 84.

108


proposed Oniad identification, but Bohak's proposal should be kept in mind as an intriguing possibility. Joseph and Aseneth consists of two distinct but related stories, the conversion of Aseneth (chaps. 1-21) and the jealousy of pharaoh's son (chaps. 22-29). The first story, which is the greater part of the whole, tells the story of the marriage of Joseph to the Egyptian Aseneth. We will discuss it in some detail in Part Two below. The political dimension of Joseph and Aseneth is found mainly in the second story. The second story in chapters 22-29 concerns the jealousy of pharaoh's son and his attempts against Joseph and Aseneth. By contrast with the pharaoh and Pentephres, pharaoh's son has no sympathy for Joseph and is portrayed as utterly ruthless. The opposition, however, is not simply between Israelite and Egyptian. Pharaoh's son plots not only against Joseph but also against the pharaoh, his own father, because he is like a father to Joseph (24:13). The strategy against Joseph is to recruit some of his brothers to betray him. Levi and Simeon refuse, although they are threatened with death, but Gad and Dan agree. These two (both sons of servant maids. Gen. 30:6, 11) are singled out as the black sheep in the family of Jacob and are blamed exclusively for selling Joseph into slavery (24:9; 25:6; 28:13). On the other hand, Levi assumes the leading role in this story. His prophetic knowledge is repeatedly emphasized — he sees Aseneth's resting place in heaven and foresees the danger of the ambush. More importantly, he restrains the anger of Simeon against pharaoh's son, since "it does not befit a pious man to return evil for evil" (23:9). This does not mean that he is a pacifist. He boasts of the destruction of Shechem, which Is viewed here as a fully justified act, and warns pharaoh's son that his sword is ready if there is further plotting against Joseph (23:12). Levi is not an aggressor, but he is willing and able to defend himself and his brethren. Again, when Benjamin is about to strike down pharaoh's son with the sword, Levi intervenes, saying that a pious man should not return evil for evil nor afflict his enemy unto death. Instead, they should heal his wound and make him their friend. Even though pharaoh's son dies from the wound, relations with pharaoh are not strained. In the case of Dan and Gad, however, it is Aseneth who intervenes to save their lives by invoking the principle of nometaliation. We are given, then, a nicely complex picture, in which the proselyte Aseneth understands what is fitting better than Simeon does, and even the pagan pharaoh comes off better than Dan and Gad.212

212. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 204-16, misses the positive portrayal of the Egyptian authorities. He notes the friendliness of Pentephres and Pharaoh towards Joseph (p. 210) but attempts to dismiss it on the ground that it is "necessary for the narrative to work at all." But the author did not have to construct the story in this way. He chose to tell a story where the goodwill of some important Egyptians was the essence of the plot and one of the points of the story.


109

The story of chapters 22-29 is evidently paradigmatic of Jewish-Gentile relations in the Egyptian Diaspora, although it is by no means a simple historical allegory. The benevolence of the sovereign is assumed. The enemy of the Jews is the enemy of the pharaoh too. This pattern is reminiscent of Esther, and we will find It again in 3 Maccabees. Yet there are also powerful forces, high at court, which are hostile to the Jews and which are represented here by pharaoh's son. Those Jews who side with pharaoh's son against their own people stand self-convicted, but the pious do not seek vengeance against either them or the hostile Gentiles. Reconciliation is best. In all of this, the pious, represented by Levi and Simeon, retain a self-sufficiency based on their strength of arms and the help of God. Their conciliatory attitude comes from strength, not from weakness. Is this political background of the book of any help in dating it? Some features seem especially appropriate for the Ptolemaic age. The treachery of pharaoh's son towards his father recalls the internecine strife of the late Ptolemaic dynasty. The armed prowess of Levi and Simeon recalls the heyday of Jewish mercenaries in Egypt, which virtually disappeared after the Roman conquest. The rise of Joseph to supreme power recalls the days when Onias and Dositheus were allegedly given power over the land of Egypt, without suggesting that Joseph is a direct allegory for any historical individual. (The prominence of Levi as priest and soldier is more suggestive in this regard.) The offer of pharaoh's son to enlist his accomplices among his hetairoi is a throwback to the old Macedonian terminology.^'^ There Is nothing in the story which clearly reflects the presence of Rome.^'* In view of all these considerations, I am inclined to date Joseph and Aseneth in the early first century B.C.E. Yet it must be admitted that the story is compatible with a Roman date.^'^ The details of the story do not have precise historical equivalents. The atritudes towards the Genriles are not greaUy different from those of 3 M a c c a b e e s . S u c h conciliatory attitudes become less likely after 70 C.E., but prior to that they are typical of the Egyptian Diaspora. The episode of Pharaoh's son in Joseph and Aseneth Is indicative of tensions between Jews and their political rivals in Egypt. These tensions were scarcely acknowledged in the Third Sibyl and the Letter of Aristeas. Yet 213. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 2:184n.63. 214. G. D. Kilpatrick, "The Last Supper," ET64 (1952/53) 4-8, and J. Jeremias, "The Last Supper," £7" 64 (1952/53) 91-92, argue for a date between 100 and 30 B . C . E . for this reason. 215. So D. Sanger, "Erwagungen zu Joseph und Aseneth," ZNW 76 (1985) 86-106. Chesnutt, From Death to Life, 85, expresses a sliglit preference for a date before 30 B . C . E . , but concludes that only a date between 100 B . C . E . and 115 C . E . can be affirmed with any confidence. 216. Cf. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 93, who expresses a slight preference for a Ptolemaic setting.

110


there must have been some tensions throughout the Ptolemaic period. The Oniads took sides in Egyptian civil conflicts, and their loyalty to Philometor and his widow inevitably placed them in conflict with Ptolemy Physcon. It does not appear that the Jewish community suffered any lasting repercussions from these clashes, but they may have contributed to later resentment against the Jews on the part of some elements in Alexandria.^''' In the first century B.C.E. we hear of the first Greek pamphlet against the Jews, by Apollonius Molon, and there is some obscure evidence of a persecution of Jews in Alexandria about 88 B . C . E . T h e s e tensions would be magnified and come into the open in the Roman period.

Greek Esther Tension between Jew and Gentile in the Diaspora was not, of course, a new phenomenon. Perhaps the most characteristic product of the eastern Diaspora in the Hellenistic age was the so-called Diasporanovelle represented by Esther and Daniel 1-6.^'^ These tales envisaged situations in which exiled Jews were threatened with mortal danger, but in the end were dramatically delivered. Like many other Hebrew and Aramaic writings, these stories were translated into Greek in the Ptolemaic period and so were available as models for Egyptian Judaism. The case of Esther is especially significant, since the expanded Greek translation was already tailored in some respects for the Egyptian milieu.•^^'^ According to the colophon appended to the Greek translation of Esther, the book was brought to Egypt by one Dositheus "in the fourth year of Ptolemy and Cleopatra" and was the work of "Lysimachus son of Ptolemy, a member of the Jerusalem community." Bickerman has shown decisively that 217. Barclay, Jews in tite Mediterranean Diaspora, 38-39. His statement that the intervention of Onias on behalf of Philometor's widow was "disastrous" is clearly an exaggeration, in view of his subsequent admission that there was not "any sudden deterioration in the fortunes of the Jews." 218. CPJ, 1:25. The evidence consists of an obscure reference in lordanis, Ro/nan History, 81. A few obscure passages in the papyri might also reflect hostility to the Jews in the Ptolemaic period, but the evidence is far from clear. There was also conflict in Cyrene about this time; see S. Applebaum, Jews and Greeks in Ancient Cyrene {SJLA 28; Leiden: Brill, 1979) 201-2. 219. See L. M. Wills, The Jew in the Court of the Foreign King: Ancient Jewish Court Legends (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990). 220. On the additions to Esther and Daniel, see C. A. Moore, Daniel, Esther and Jeremiah: The Additions (AB 44; Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1977); G. Vermes and M. Goodman, in Schiirer, The History of the Jewish People, 3.2:718-22; Wills, The Jewish Novel, 11628. At least some of the additions to Esther were composed in Greek. This does not seem to be the case with Daniel. The additions to Daniel show no special links to Egyptian Judaism.


111

the date in question was the fourth year of Ptolemy XII Auletes and Cleopatra V, that is, 78/77 B.C.E.^^' There is no good reason to doubt the reliability of the colophon on the question of provenance.^'^^ It appears, then, that Greek Esther is not a product of Egyptian Judaism, but like 2 Maccabees was sent to Egypt from Jerusalem, and may have been modified in the light of its destination. The Greek version of Esther contains six extended additions to the text now found in the Masoretic text: Mordecai's dream (Addition A) and its interpretation (F); a royal letter commanding the extermination of the Jews (B) and a second letter countermanding it (E); the prayers of Mordecai and Esther (C); and a description of Esther's going before the king unsummoned (D). In addition to these there are various scattered alterations of the Hebrew text.^'^^ The expansions and changes serve two main purposes.^2'* They clarify the Hebrew text — for example, by having Mordecai explain in his prayer why he refused to bow to Haman. They also provide the explicit piety which is strikingly lacking in the Hebrew. So Esther professes in her prayer that she has not partaken of the king's table, although this is most implausible in the context of the story. Two other modifications are more significant for our present study. First, in the dream of Mordecai and again in its interpretation, there is a simple antithesis between Israel and "every nation" which "got itself ready for battle that it might fight against the righteous nation" (A 6). God "made two lots, one for the people of God and one for all the nations."^^5 Second, Haman is said to be a Macedonian who was plotting to gain control for the Macedonians over the Persians. The rigid division between Israel and the nations and the exaggerated emphasis on the separatist piety of Esther may be taken to reflect the Hasmo221. E. J. Bickerman, "The Colophon of the Greek Book of Esther," in Studies in Jewish and Christian History, 1:225-45 (originally published in JBL 63 [1944]). The decisive points are the use of the singular basileuontos for the reign of king and queen, and the fact that the name of the king precedes that of the queen. This usage is incompatible with the reigns of Ptolemy IX (114/113) and XIII (49-48), since the queen was regent in the fourth year of each of their reigns and her name therefore preceded the king's. Moore {The Additions, 250), following B. Jacob ("Das Buch Esther bei dem LXX," ZAW 10 [1890] 241-98), regards 114/113 as the more probable date. H. Bardtke {Zusdtze zu Esther [JSHRZ 1.1; Gutersloh: Mohn, 1973] 27) dates the translation to the time of the Maccabean revolt but provides no objective evidence. 222. E. J. Bickerman ("Notes on the Greek Book of Esther," in Studies in Jewish and Christian History, l:258n.41 [originally published in Proceedings of the Atnerican Academy for Jewish Research 20 (1951)]) refutes tlie contention of Jacob and others that the translation has an Egyptian flavor. 223. Bickerman, "Notes," 246-56; Moore, Additions, 153-68. Both provide discussion of the complex textual transmission. 224. Bickerman, "Notes," 256-68. 225. Bickerman, "Notes," 268-74. The term lots is presumably used because of the association with Purim, but it recalls the deterministic language of the Qumran scrolls. The imagery of the dream, though not its interpretation, is reminiscent of the apocalyptic literature, whieh became popular in Palestine in the second century B . C . E .

112


nean milieu in whieh the translation was made. It is noteworthy that such an exclusive and nationalist view of Judaism was quite compatible with the use of the Greek language and mastery of Greek style,^^^ as we have found earlier in the epic of Theodotus. The identification of Haman as a Macedonian is especially apt for the situation of Alexandrian J u d a i s m . T h e story of Esther was centered on the rivalry between a Jewish and a pagan courtier. In Alexandria, the relevant courtiers who were rivals to the Jews were the Macedonians. Greek Esther goes beyond the Hebrew in accusing Haman of plotting against the state. The issue between the courtiers is no longer simple ambition, but devotion to the state. The accusations against the Jews in the first decree are parallel to those against Haman in the second. In the first, the Jews are accused of obstructing government by their peculiar customs. In the second, Haman is accused of conspiring against the king, while the Jews are vindicated and recognized (in the person of Mordecai) as benefactors. Even more clearly than in the Hebrew original, the triumph of the Jews takes place within the context of the undisputed rule of the Gentile king. If the Jews slaughter their enemies, they do so by the king's permission and are nonetheless his excellent servants. The Greek translation of Esther may, in a sense, be regarded as Hasmonean propaganda.•^^^ It urged the Jews of the Egyptian Diaspora to celebrate the feast of Purim like the rest of their brethren. It propagated separatist attitudes towards the Gentiles in religious observance. Yet it did not interfere with the political allegiance of Diaspora Jews. It provided them rather with moral support in their efforts to rise within the service of the kingdom. The antagonism of Jew and Gentile and the fantasy of vengeance with which Greek Esther concludes are atypical of the literature of the Ptolemaic period, but they anticipate ominously the events of the Roman era. The advent of Rome introduced a new factor which could only complicate the relationships of the Jews. The increasing dissonance of Diaspora life in the first century C.E. is reflected in a Diasporanovelle of Egyptian Jewish origin in 3 Maccabees and would ultimately erupt in the great Diaspora revolt in the time of Trajan.

226- On the elements of Greek style in Greek Esther, see Bickerman, "Notes," 256-65. He comments on the (initially) unexplained dream as a Hellenistic device. 227. Addition E 10, 14. See CPJ. 1:24. 228. Bickerman ("The Colophon," 244): "The historical background of this literature is the violent and implacable war between the Maccabees and the Greek cities in Palestine."

CHAPTER 3

Religion and Politics: The Roman Period

T h e Status of the J e w s in R o m a n E g y p t The initial relations between Egyptian Jewry and the Romans were friendly.^ The Jews had supported the attempt of Gabinius to reestablish Ptolemy XII Auletes in 55 B.C.E. and Julius Caesar's intervention on behalf of Cleopatra in 47 B.C.E.2 Josephus refers to a "slab which stands in Alexandria recording the rights bestowed upon the Jews by Caesar the Great" (Ag. Ap. 2.37) and asserts that he declared them citizens of Alexandria (Ant. 14.10.1 § 188). This report is certainly incorrect. Julius Caesar may have granted citizenship to individual Jews in recognition of their services,^ but it is quite clear from the subsequent history that the Jews as a class were never full citizens of Alexandria.'* The documents cited by Josephus relating to Jewish communities in 1. On the relations between Jews and Romans, see, in general, J. Juster, Les Juifs dans {'empire Remain {2 vols.; Paris: Geuthner, 1914); E. M. Smallwood, The Jem under Roman Rule (SJLA 20; Leiden: Brill, 1976). See also J. J. Collins, Jewish Wisdom in the Hellenistic Age (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1997) 135-57 ("The Diaspora Setting"). 2. H. I. Bell, Juden and Griechen im Romischen Alexandreia (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1926) 9; V. Tcherikover and A. Fuks, eds.. Corpus Papyrorum Iudaicarum (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1957) 1:55 (hereafter CPJ); A. Kasher, The Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt (Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1985) 12-18. 3. Smallwood (The Jews, 227): "It is beyond dispute that some individual Jews in Alexandria obtained Greek citizenship." She mentions two specific cases: Philo's brother Alexander, who was alabarch (customs official) in the thirties, and another Jew, Demetrius, who held the same position under Claudius. See A H A 18.6.3 §159; 20.5.2 §100; 20.7.3 §147. 4. Smallwood, The Jews. 224-30. Tcherikover, CPJ. l:56n.20, objects that Caesar was never official ruler of Alexandria and suggests that the privileges were granted by Augustus. Kasher, The Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt, 17, argues that they were granted by Julius Caesar in the context of political arrangements imposed on Egypt. Josephus cites several docu-

113

114


Asia Minor show that it was Roman policy to allow the Jews to live in accordance with their ancestral laws. In this matter the Romans continued the policy of the Ptolemies and Seleucids.^ There does not appear to have been any formal charter or bill of Jewish rights, either in Alexandria or elsewhere.^ At the beginning of the Roman era, the Jews made up a significant part of the population of Alexandria. Philo claims that they occupied two of the five districts of Alexandria and that "there were no less than a million Jews resident in Alexandria and the country from the slope into Libya to the boundaries of Ethiopia" (In Flaccum 43). Philo's numbers are not reliable, but even a modern estimate that puts the Jewish population of Alexandria at 180,000 still allows that they may have made up as much as one third of the city.'' The community had its own organization and enjoyed a limited measure of autonomy. Josephus cites Strabo for the claim that "in Egypt territory has been set apart for a Jewish settlement, and in Alexandria a great part of the city has been allocated to this nation. And an ethnarch of their own has been installed, who governs the people and adjudicates suits and supervises contracts and ordinances, just as if he were the head of a sovereign state."^ The office of ethnarch was apparently discontinued by Augustus in 11-12 C.E. and replaced by a gerousia, or council of elders.^ The organization of the Jewish community was not seriously altered. Other ethnic groups In Egypt also had their own communal organizations. The Idumaeans of Memphis were organized as a politeuma, held meetings (synagogai) in the temple of their god, Qos, and issued decrees. The core community was composed of mercenaries, but there were also supporting members from the broader Idumaean community, called sympoliteuomenoO^ The Jewish community of Alexandria is called a politeuma in the meiits relating to the privileges of Jews in other places, but he conspicuously fails to quote from the alleged stele in Alexandria. 5. The prototypical charter of Jewish rights in the Jlellenistic world was issued by Antiochus III of Syria when he captured Jerusalem in 198 B . C . E . (Anf. 12.3.3 §§138-44). See E. J. Bickerman. "La Charte seleucide de Jerusalem," in idem. Studies in Jewish and Christian History (3 vols.; AGJU 9; Leiden: Brill, 1976-86) 2:44-85. 6. T. Rajak, "Was There a Roman Charter for the Jews?" Journal of Roman Studies 74 (1984) 107-203. 7. J. M. Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt: From Rameses U to Emperor Hadrian (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995) 73, following D. Delia, Alexandrian Citizenship during the Roman Principate (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1991). On the absence of registers of Jews before 70 C . E . , see S. J. D. Cohen, "Those Who Say They Are Jews and Are Not," in S. J, D. Cohen and E. Frerichs, eds., Diasporas in Antiquity (Atlanta: Scholars Press. 1993) 2225. 8. Ant. XA.l.l §§114-18; M. Stern, Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism (3 vols.; Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1974-84) 1:277-82. 9. Philo, /;( Flaccum 74. Josephus claims that Augustus "did not prevent the continued appointment of ethnarchs" (Ant. 19.5.2 §283), but Philo's account is more credible. 10. D. J. Thompson, Memphis under the Ptolemies (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1988) 101-2. See also her essay, D. J. Thompson-Crawford, "The Idumaeans of Mem-

RELIGION AND POLITICS: THE ROMAN PERIOD

115

Letter of Aristeas 310, where the translation of the Torah into Greek is acclaimed by "the priests and the elders from among the translators and from among the people of the politeuma and the leaders of the congregation (tou plethous)." It is usually assumed that the politeuma and the plethos are one and the same, although the point is disputed.^' The term politeuma is also found in inscriptions, referring to the Jewish community of Berenice in Cyrenaica,^^ and, reportedly, in the archive of a Jewish community in Heracleopolis.^^ Jewish communities in the Hellenistic Diaspora are also variously referred to as loudaioi, laos, katoikia, ethnos, synodos, and synagoge.^'* The precise connotation of these terms may vary. The term politeuma could refer to "festival associations of women, a cult society, a club of soldiers, associations of citizens from the same city living abroad, and ethnic communities."'^ The larger Alexandrian Jewish community encompassed many synagogai}^ Despite the strong tradition that Jews could live in accordance with their own laws, the papyri record only Jewish litigation before Gentile courts. Jewish law could serve as civil law in disputes between Jews, but it was never the highest court of appeal. Ultimate authority lay with the Ptolemaic king or the Roman prefect.'^ While the Romans honored Ptolemaic precedent regarding the rights of the Jews, their conquest of Egypt made the status of the Jews more problematic than it had previously been. The line between citizens and noncitizens was now more sharply d r a w n . I n 24/23 B.C.E., Augustus imposed a poll tax, known as the laographia, on the Egyptians. The Greek citizens of Alexandria, and probably those of Ptolemals and Naucratis, were exempted. In 4/5 C.E. a third class was created, to take account of Greeks outphis and the Ptolemaic Politeumata," in M. Gigante, ed., Atti del XVII Congresso Internazionale di Papirologia (Naples: Centro Internazionale per lo Studio dei Papiri Ercolanesi, 1984) 3:1069-75. 11. G. Liideritz, "What Is the Politeuma?" in J. W. van Henten and P. W. van der Horst, eds.. Studies in Early Jewish Epigraphy (Leiden: Brill, 1994) 183-225, suggests that the politeuma here is a body representing Alexandria. C. Zuckerman, "Hellenistic Politeumata and the Jews: A Reconsideration," Scripta Classica Israelica 8-10 (1985-88) 171-85, argues that it represents Jerusalem. 12. E Millar, in E. Schiirer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 B.C.-A.D. 135) (rev. and ed. G. Vermes, F. Millar, and M. Goodman; 3 vols.; Edinburgh: Clark, 1973-87) 3.1:88. 13. J. Cowey, "Zwei Archive aus dem zweite Jahrhundert vor Christus" (paper presented at the Twenty-first International Congress of Papyrology, Berlin, August 1995). 14. F. Millar, in Schurer, The History of the Jewish People. 3.1:87-107. 15. LUderitz, "What Is the Politeuma?" 89. 16. S. Applebaum, "The Organization of Jewish Communities in the Diaspora," in S. Safrai and M. Stern, eds.. The Jewish People in the First Century (CRINT 1.1; Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974) 475. 17. See Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 99-119. 18. Smallwood, The Jews, 231-32; CPJ 1:60-62; Modrzejewski, Tiie Jews of Egypt. 161-63.

116


side the cities.'^ This class included descendants of military settlers, graduates of the gymnasia, and residents of Egyptian metropoleis. This intermediate class paid the laographia tax, but at a reduced rate. The Jews did not constitute a special class. Jews who were citizens of Alexandria were exempt, but they were presumably few. Some Jews might, in principle, qualify for the reduced rate.^^ Yet no Jewish names are found in the numerous documents dealing with applications for this s t a t u s . • Aryeh Kasher has claimed that "there is good reason to think that the members of the Jewish politeuma in Alexandria enjoyed isoteleia (tax equality) with the citizens of the polls, a privilege apparently extended to anyone entitled to be called an 'Alexandrian.'"^^ The supposed evidence is found in Josephus, who Is not, unfortunately, a reliable guide to the official understanding of technical terms by the Roman authority. Josephus claims that the Jews in Alexandria were called "Alexandrians,"^^ and he even puts a statement to that effect in an edict attributed to Claudius.^^ As we shall see below, that edict is discredited by the indisputably authentic Letter of Claudius preserved on papyrus {CPJ 153). Another fragmentary papyrus throws merciless light on the usage of the Roman tax collectors. This papyrus {CPJ 151) records the petition of one Helenos, the son of Tryphon, who began by calling himself an Alexandrian, but had to correct this to "a Jew from Alexandria." Helenos appealed for exemption from the laographia on the grounds that his father was "an Alexandrian" and that he himself had received "the appropriate education as far as my father's means allowed." The correction of his claim to be an Alexandrian, however, undermines his petition. We do not know whether his father actually was an Alexandrian citizen. The precision of the terminology was more important in the case of the son.^^ Josephus also claims that the Jews of Cyrene and Asia appealed to Augustus and that he granted them "the same equality of taxation (isoteleian) as before."^'^ But the documents cited in the following passages show that the issue was the confiscation of money sent by Jews to Jerusalem.•^^ The incident has no bearing on taxation in Alexandria. It is usually assumed that the new tax, with its clear-cut distinction be19. CPJ, 1:59; Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 163; Kasher, The Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt, 76. 20. See especially Kasher, The Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt. 74-105. 21. Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 163. 22. Kasher, The Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt, 19. 23. Ag. Ap. 2.38. 24. Ant. 19.5.2 §281. 25. See Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 164; V. Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization and the Jews {New York: Atheneum, 1970) 312. 26. Ant. 16.6.2 §§160-61. 27. A similar incident had arisen in 59 B . C . E . , involving the proconsul L. Valerius Flaccus, who was defended by Cicero.


117

tween Alexandrian citizens at one end of the spectrum and common Egyptians at the other, entailed a degrading reduction of status for most Jews. Tcherilcover tells us that for Alexandrian Jews "the payment of laographia was not merely an additional expense but also a mark of extreme political and cultural degradation, putting them on the same level with the Egyptian fellahin."^^ Modrzejewski refers to "a sudden and deplorable deterioration of their status."^^ Recently, however, Gruen has claimed that "there is no direct testimony that the Augustan census and imposition of a poll-tax reduced Jews to a station equivalent to that of the Egyptians."^" Jewish literature, with the arguable exception of 3 Maccabees, is silent on the issue, but then we should hardly expect Philo or Josephus to raise it if it were a matter of embarrassment. There were, to be sure, attempts to escape the tax, and these inevitably make status the Issue rather than money. Helenos bases his petition partly on his education. The so-called Boule papyrus from 19-21 C.E. (CPJ 150) preserves an appeal to Rome for the restoration of the Alexandrian city council or boule. The Alexandrians promised to "take care that the citizen-body of Alexandria is not corrupted by men who are uncultured and uneducated." The reference is very probably to the Jews.^^ The only text that makes a comparison between the status of the Jews and that of the Egyptians is found in the Acts of the Alexandrian Martyrs, which views the conflicts in Alexandria from the viewpoint of the Greek leaders of the city, who were both anti-Jewish and a n t i - R o m a n . O n e fragment (CPJ 156) reports an antiJewish diatribe by Isidorus, one of the Alexandrian leaders. "Are they not of the same nature as the Alexandrians but live rather after the fashion of the Egyptians. Are they not on a level with those who pay the tax?" Gruen attempts to dismiss this text on the grounds that it is "propaganda," but what it shows is precisely that the laographia was an issue in the inter-community polemics in Alexandria.^^ The issue is not whether the Jews were objectively equal to the Egyptians, but whether the laographia created the perception

28. CPJ, 1:6L His most complete discussion of ttie laographia is found in "Syntaxis and Laographia," Journal of Juristic Papyrology 4 (1950) 179-207. 29. Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 163. S. L. Wallace, "Census and Poll-tax in Ptolemaic Egypt," American Journal of Philology 59 (1938)418-42, argued that Augustus took over the Ptolemaic system of taxation, but his evidence is weak. There are no receipts for such a tax from the Ptolemaic period. 30. E. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism: The Reinvention of Jewish Tradition (Berkeley: University of Califomia Press, 1998) 226. 31. Tchtnkover, Hellenistic Civilization, 313. 32. H. Musurillo, The Acts of the Pagan Martyrs: Acta Alexandrinorum (Oxford: Clarendon, 1954). 33. In the papyrus. King Agrippa replies to Isidorus that the tax was imposed on Egyptians, not on the Jews. This does not mean that the Jews did not pay the tax, but that it was not imposed with them primarily in mind. Kasher, The Jews in Helletustic and Roman Egypt, 34344, also tries to downplay the significance of this text.

118


that they were. The Acts, of course, does not tell us how the Jews felt about the tax, but the inference that it was a source of embarrassment and aggravation is not unreasonable. We know of no disturbances involving the Egyptian Jews under Augustus and Tiberius, but matters came to a head under Gains (Caligula). The Roman prefect Flaccus had been a protege of Tiberius and felt his position and life were in jeopardy under the new emperor. Accordingly, his authority deteriorated and he became subject to the influence of the Alexandrian nationalists, Lampo and Isidorus. These inclined him against the Jews, and the situation was exacerbated by the untimely visit of King Agrippa, which provoked the mockery of the Greeks and was perceived as a threat to the authority of Flaccus. The ensuing riots and the subsequent delegations to Gains are described in Philo's treatises In Flaccum and Legatio ad Gaium. They have often been discussed in modern scholarship and need not be dealt with in detail here.^* At the heart of the crisis was Flaccus's attack on the rights of the Jewish politeuma by a proclamation in which he declared that the Jews were "aUens and foreigners" in Alexandria. The Jews would now be confined to only one of the five sections of Alexandria and so, in effect, to a ghetto.^^ A virtual pogrom ensued. Jewish property, including synagogues, was seized. One incident, highlighted by Philo, shows that the status of the Jews was at the heart of the conflict: There are differences between the scourges used in the city, and these differences are regulated by the social standing of the persons to be beaten. The Egyptians actually are scourged with a different kind of lash and by a different set of people, the Alexandrians with a flat blade, and the persons who wield them also are Alexandrians. This custom was also observed in the case of our people by the predecessors of Flaccus and by Flaccus himself in his first years of office. . .. Surely then it was the height of harshness that when commoners among the Alexandrian Jews, if they appeared to have done things worthy of stripes, were beaten with whips more suggestive of freemen and citizens, the magistrates, the gerousia, whose very name implies age and honor, in this respect fared worse than their inferiors and were treated like Egyptians of the meanest rank and guilty of the greatest iniquities. {In Flaccum 78-80) According to Philo, Flaccus had Jewish magistrates flogged and tortured in the theatre and executed. The attack on the gerousia would seem to undo 34. See H. Box, Philonis Alexandrini m Flaccum (Oxford: Oxford University, 1939); E. M. Smallwood, Philonis Alexandrini Legatio ad Gaium (2d ed.; Leiden: Brill, 1970); Smallwood, The Jews, 235-50; CPJ, 1:65-74. 35. Philo, //( Flaccum, 53-54. See Smallwood, Legatio, 20-21.

RELIGION A N D POLITICS: THE ROMAN PERIOD

119

whatever privileges and status the Jewish politeuma had enjoyed. The prominence that Philo gives to the kind of scourge used shows that for him a central issue was whether the Jews were to be treated like Alexandrians or like "Egyptians of the meanest rank." Flaccus proceeded to have the soldiers search the Jewish houses for arms. Philo, of course, only views the events from the Jewish side and sees only naked, unprovoked aggression by the Alexandrians and Flaccus. It is apparent, however, that Flaccus still ran afoul of the Alexandrians, and so he cannot have sided with them as completely as Philo suggests.Moreover, the Jewish community evidently had arms and used them in 41 C.E. after the death of Caligula.^'' Both the Jews and the Alexandrians sent embassies to Caligula, headed by Philo and Apion respectively. The Jews had to wait months for an audience and then were met with contempt and ridicule. At the same time, Caligula provoked a crisis in Judea by ordering that his statue be installed in the Jerusalem temple. That crisis was resolved when he was assassinated in 41 C.E. The Jews in Alexandria seized the occasion to take vengeance on the Greeks, and the Roman army had to intervene. The new emperor, Claudius, then issued an edict to settle the dispute in Alexandria. The Letter of Claudius is preserved on papyrus (CPJ 153), first published in 1924. He refused to assign responsibility for the disturbances "or rather, to speak the truth, the war against the Jews," but urged both sides to desist. The Alexandrians should "behave gently and kindly towards the Jews who have inhabited the same city for many years, and not dishonor any of their customs in their worship of their god, but allow them to keep their own ways, as they did in the time of the god Augustus and as I too having heard both sides have confirmed." The Jews, conversely, were ordered not to aim at more than they have previously had, not in future to send two embassies as if they lived in two cities, a thing which has never been done before, and not to intrude themselves into the games presided over by the gymnasiarchoi and the kosmetai, since they enjoy what is their own, and in a city which is not their own they possess an abundance of good things. Nor are they to bring in or invite Jews coming from Syria or Egypt If they disobey, I shall proceed against them in every way as fomenting a common plague for the whole world. 36. Flaccus was arrested and put on trial in Rome, where he was accused by Lampo and Isidorus. His property was confiscated and he was sentenced to deportation. 37. Ant. 19.5.2 §278. Tcherikover {CPJ, 1:68) notes that the Jews were unable to defend themselves in 38 c.E. but took the initiative in 41. He infers that arms and reinforcements were smuggled in from outside Alexandria.

120


The reference to two embassies is usually taken to reflect some division in the Jewish community, on the assumption that the reference is to two Jewish delegations.^^ It is more likely, however, that Claudius meant that there should not be two delegations from Alexandria, as if the Jews inhabited a separate city. The position taken by Claudius is quite clear. He confirms the traditional Jewish right to live according to their ancestral laws, but he states unequivocally that they live in a city not their own. The Jews, in short, are not citizens, and are not Alexandrians. The evidence of the papyrus on this issue is incompatible with the edict of Claudius preserved by Josephus in Ant. 19.5.2 §280-85, which says that the Jews in Alexandria are called Alexandrians and had received equal civic rights (isepoliteia) from the beginning.^^ Claudius strove for impartiality. He had Isidorus and Lampon executed for slander when they brought accusations against King Agrippa, who was the emperor's friend.^'* But he was not nearly so favorable to the Jews as Josephus would have us believe. Claudius ordered the Jews "not to aim at more than they have previously had," thereby acknowledging that Jewish agitation was a contributing cause of the conflict. The goal of that agitation has been a matter of dispute in modern scholarship. Tcherikover argued that the Jews aspired to full citizenship.^' Kasher, in contrast, argues that Jews could not aspire to full citizenship, for religious reasons, and that "their true aim was a separate, independent life."^^ His argument depends heavily on his understanding of the politeuma as a quasi-independent political entity, whose members could enjoy a status equal to that of citizens (isepoliteia). But this understanding has been universally rejected.Isepoliteia in the strict sense was a reciprocal arrangement between Greek cities, and no such agreements are known between a polls and a politeuma.^^ A further issue concerns access to the gymnasium. 38. Tcherikover suggests that the second delegation represented a more radical stratum of Jewish society. For a summary of the discussion, see R. Barraclough, "Philo's Politics, Roman Rule and Hellenistic Judaism," ANRW, 11.21.1 (1984) 435-36. 39. See the discussion in CPJ, 1:70-71. Tcherikover allows that an authentic edict may have been altered. For an attempt to defend the authenticity of the edict, see Kasher, The Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt, 262-89. 40. See Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 173-83. The fate of Isidorus and Lampo is described in the imaginative Acts of the Alexandrian Martyrs. The relevant texts can be found in CPJ, 2:55-81 and Tcherikover's comments in CPJ, 1:72. See also Musurillo, The Acts of the Pagan Martyrs: and Smallwood, The Jews, 250-55. The Agrippa in question was Agrippa I, and the trial should be dated about 41 C . E . 41. See, e.g., CPJ, 1:63, 42. Kasher, The Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt, 230. See also Kasher, "The Civic Status of Jews in Ptolemaic Egypt," in P. Bilde et al., eds.. Ethnicity in Hellenistic Egypt (Aarhus: Aarhus University Press, 1992) 100-21. 43. Luderitz, "What Is the Politeuma?"; Zuckerman, "Hellenistic Politeumata and the Jews"; Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 163-64. 44. S. Applebaum, 'The Legal Status of the Jewish Communities in the Diaspora," in S. Safrai and M. Stem, eds., The Jewish People in the First Century (CRINT 1.1; Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974) 436, 438.


121

Tcherikover understands the Letter of Claudius to mean that Jews were trying to infiltrate the gymnasium and thereby pass themselves off as citizens or enjoy some of the benefits of citizenship. Kasher, in contrast, takes the Letter to say that the Jews should not harass the games, reading the verb epispairein (the original editor's reading) instead of Tcherikover's epispaiein.^^ In Kasher's view, gymnasia in Alexandria were hotbeds of anti-Jewish activity and consequently the scene of conflict. The reading is admittedly difficult, but Tcherikover's interpretation coheres well with the warning to the Jews not to seek more than they already had, and also with the concern expressed in the Boule papyrus about the corruption of the citizen body. If Tcherikover is right, conflict would have developed because of the opposition of the Alexandrians to the presence of Jews in the gymnasium. Isidorus and Lampon were gymnasiarchs, but their involvement can be explained on either interpretation. Kasher's insistence that Jews "rejected Alexandrian citizenship with all its material benefits"*^ is based on 3 Maccabees, which is not necessarily representative of all Egyptian Jews. There is no doubt that some Jews enjoyed Alexandrian citizenship. Some of those forsook their ancestral religion, as Dositheus, son of Drimylus, had in the early Ptolemaic period and as Philo's nephew, Tiberius Julius Alexander, did in the Roman period.*^ Others may have managed to finesse the religious demands of the civic institutions.*^ Philo's whole family may have enjoyed Roman citizenship, since his brother Alexander held the position of alabarch in Alexandria, and several members of the family had the middle name Julius. Philo seems to have had firsthand knowledge of the gymnasium*^ and yet to have remained an observant Jew. Apion's question, "Why then, if they are citizens, do they not worship the same gods as the Alexandrians?" {Ag. Ap. 2.65), presupposes that some Jews claimed to be citizens and yet refused to participate in the civic worship. Some of their claims may have lacked any legal basis. The words "citizen" and "Alexandrian" admit of an imprecise nontechnical sense, and both Philo and Josephus exploit the ambiguity.^^ Kasher may well be right that what most Alexandrian Jews wanted was parity with the Alexandrians in 45. Kasher, Tiie Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt, 314-2L Tcherikover rejects this reading in CPJ, 2:53. See also J. M. G. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora from Alexander to Trajan (323 BCE-II? CE) (Edinburgh: Clark, 1996) 58-59. 46. Kasher, The Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt, 230. 47. Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 185-90. 48. Cf. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 66-70. 49. L. H. Feldinan, Jew and Gentile in the Ancient World (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993) 57-63; A. Mendelson, Secular Education in Philo of Alexandria (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College, 1982) 25-26. 50. See further Collins, Jewish Wisdom, 142-43. See also W. Horbury and D. Noy, Jewish Inscriptions of Graeco-Roman Egypt (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992) 19396 for the nontechnical use of "citizens" (politai) in epitaphs.

122


esteem and privilege rather than citizenship in itself. But such parity was not guaranteed by the status of the politeuma, at least in the Roman era, when lines were clearly drawn for purposes of taxation. There was clearly a discrepancy between the rights to which the Jews laid claim and those which either the Romans or the Alexandrians were prepared to grant. This discrepancy was a major source of the conflicts that erupted in the first and early second century C.E.

The Third Book of M a c c a b e e s The turmoil of the early Roman period may be reflected indirectly in the "Diaspora novel" known as 3 Maccabees.^' This is a historical novel in the tradition of Esther,^'^ which evidently combines material from various s o u r c e s . I t Is neither a reliable historical source^* nor an allegory of a specific situation. The view of the relationships between the various groups in the novel may reflect more than one period in the history of the Diaspora, but it is at least illuminating to read it against the background of the early Roman period. 3 Maccabees Is a melodramatic account of two alleged episodes in the career of Ptolemy IV Philopator (222-203 B.C.E.). The first concerns an attempt by the Ptolemy to enter the temple of Jerusalem, and his miraculous prevention. The second concerns the persecution of the Egyptian Jews by reducing them "to the popular census and slave condition" (eis laographian kai oiketiken diathesin, 2:28) and branding them with the emblem of Dionysus. When the majority of the Jews resisted, the king is said to have rounded them up and ordered them to be trampled by elephants. The execution of this order is thwarted first by lapses of the king's memory, then by the miraculous intervention of two angels. Finally, the king is brought to repentance and becomes benevolent to the Jews. These stories are stereotypical and adapt traditional materials. There 51. For text and translation, see M. Hadas, The Third and Fourth Books of Maccabees (Dropsie College Edition; New York: Harper, 1953). Annotated translations in C. W. Emmet, "The Third Book of Maccabees," in APOT, 1:156-73; H. Anderson, "3 Maccabees," in OTP, 2:509-29, A commentary on the text can be found in A. Paul, "Le Troisifeme Livre des Macchabees,"^/^^ 11.20.1 (1987) 298-336. 52. L. M. Wills, The Jewish Novel in the Ancient World (Ithaca. N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1995) 201-6; R. I. Pervo, Profit with Delight: The Literary Genre of the Acts of the Apostles (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987) 120. See also M. Hadas, "III Maccabees and the Tradition of Patriotic Romance," Chronique d'Egypte 47 (1949) 97-104, 53. J. Tromp, "The Formation of the Third Book of Maccabees," Henoch 17(1995) 31128. 54. Pace Kasher, The Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt, 211-32.


123

are numerous points of eontact with 2 M a c c a b e e s . T h e attempt of Philopator to enter the temple is clearly based on the incident involving Heliodorus in 2 Maccabees. The general situation in the persecution story is reminiscent of Esther, especially in its conclusion, when the Jews are permitted to take revenge on their enemies and institute an annual festival. There are verbal parallels between 3 Maccabees and Greek Esther, which are so close as to require us to assume literary influence.^'' Moreover, the style of the work shows many similarities to the Greek r o m a n c e s . Y e t there is general agreement that the book reflects some historical episodes, however obliquely. The opening account of the battle of Raphia resembles that given by Polybius in several details; Dositheus, son of Drimylus, is independently attested (but not his role in saving the king), and the references to the cult of Dionysus (2:29-30) may draw on traditions from the time of Philopator.59 Aryeh Kasher, following Y. Gutman, has even claimed "that its contents can be corroborated as genuinely historical without departing from its own chronological framework,"^'* but at most we can speak of historical reminiscences.^^ The fantastic genre of the story should warn against any attempt to treat it as "genuinely historical." The account of the persecution of the Jews has also been thought to reflect an historical event. Josephus preserves a variant of this story in Ag. Ap. 2.53-55 but sets it in the reign of Ptolemy VIII Euergetes II ( P h y s c o n ) . I n view of Physcon's notorious cruelty and the opposition of the Jews in his civil war with Cleopatra II (the widow of Philometor),^^ Tcherikover and others have argued that the story is a melodramatic dramatization of the real threat to the Jews

55. Emmet, "The Third Boolt of Maccabees," in APOT, L156; Hadas, The Third and Fourth Books of Maccabees, 11-12. V. Tcherikover, "The Third Book of Maccabees as a Historical Source," Scripta Hierosolymitana 7 (1961) 5-6; Tromp, "The Formation," 318-24. 56. Hadas, The Third and Fourth Books, 6-7. 57. Ibid., 7-8; C. A. Moore, Daniel. Esther, and Jeremiah: The Additions (AB 44; Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1977) 195-99. The direction of the influence is disputed, but in view of the independent evidence for dating both works, the priority of Greek Esther must be assumed. It is significant that the parallels are not confined to the Greek additions to Esther, as we might expect if 3 Maccabees were prior. 58. Hadas, "III Maccabees and the Tradition of the Patriotic Romance." 59. Tcherikover, "The Third Book," 2-5. On Philopator's promotion of the cult of Dionysus, see the discussion of Artapanus in Chapter 1 above. 60. A. Kasher, "Anti-Jewish Persecutions in Alexandria in the Reign of Ptolemy Philopator according to III Maccabees," in Studies in the History of the Jewish People and the Land of Israel (vol. 4; ed. U. Rappaport; Haifa: Haifa University, 1978) 59-76 (Hebrew with English summary). 61. See the critique of Kasher by F. Parente, "The Third Book of Maccabees as Ideological Document and Historical Source," Henoch 10 (1988) 161-66. 62. Since Josephus says that Physcon's concubine, who interceded for the Jews, was variously called Ithaca or Irene, it would .seem that he knew more than one version of the story. 63. See R M. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria (2 vols.; Oxford: Clarendon, 1972) 1:11923.

124


in his r e i g n . S i n c e Physcon gave an amnesty to his enemies when he was reconciled with Cleopatra, the miraculous deliverance of the story may reflect the unexpected reprieve of the Jews. Here again we can only speak of partially historical reminiscences which are used as building blocks in a fictional composition.^^ In its present form, 3 Maccabees must be dated to Roman times. Bickerman showed that the opening formulae in the letters at 3:12 and 7:1 can be no earlier than the first century B.C.E.^'' Moreover, there is an allusion in 3 Mace. 6:6 to the Song of the Three Young Men in the Additions to Daniel in the Septuagint.^^ This allusion can hardly be earlier than 100 B.C.E., certainly not as early as the reign of Philopator. A more specific indication of date may be provided by the statement in 2:28 that the Jews should be reduced to the popular census (laographia) and slave condition. While the word laographia simply means "census," and censuses had been taken in Ptolemaic times, the word took on a special connotation in Roman times. It referred to the poll tax introduced by Augustus in 24/23 B.C.E. This was the only laographia which could be said to involve a reduction of status for the Jews, because of the clear distinction between citizens and non-citizens as discussed a b o v e . S o Tcherikover and Hadas conclude that 3 Maccabees 64. Tcherikover, "The Third Book," 6-9; Hadas, The Third and Fourth Books, IL 65. Tromp, "The Formation," 317, rightly concludes that neither Josephus nor 3 Maccabees is dependent on the other, but (hat both drew on a common tradition, probably a festival legend. The historical setting of the legend must have been obscure. 66. Parente, "The Third Book of Maccabees," 148-67, gives a good summary of research. See also M. Goodman, in Schiirer, The History of the Jewish People, 3.1:537-41. Emmet {"The Third Book of Maccabees," 158) argues for a date at the end of the second century B . C . E . because of general similarities with 2 Maccabees and Pseudo-Aristeas. B. Motzo ("11 Rifacimento Greco di Ester e il 111 Mac," Saggi di Storia e Letteratura Giudeo-Ellenistica [Firenze: Le Monnier, 1924] 272-90) argued that it must antedate Greek Esther, and this argument was accepted by G. W. E. Nickelsburg, Resurrection, Immortality, and Eternal Life in Intertestamental Judaism (HTS 26; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University, 1972) 90-91. Despite these positions, the arguments of Bickerman and Tcherikover noted below seem decisive. Parente argues that the original core dates from the early second century B . C . E . and the final edition from the early Roman era. So also G. W. E. Nickelsburg, "Stories of Biblical and Early Post-Biblical Times," in M. E. Stone, ed., Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period (CRINT 2.2; Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984) 83. 67. E. J. Bickerman, "Makkabaerbiicher (111)," PWRE 27 (1928) 797-800. 68. M. Delcor, "The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Hellenistic Period," in W. D. Davies and L. Finkelstein, eds.. The Cambridge History of Judaism. Volume Two: The Hellenistic Age (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989) 496; Goodman, in Schiirer, The Histoiy of the Jewish People, 3.1:539. 69. This is disputed by Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 226, but his argument that "it is equally possible, for all we know, that Ptolemy levied a tax which encompassed Jews and which could have been regarded as a compromise of their privileges" is merely an appeal to the unknown. The argument of Wallace, "Census and Poll-Tax," that the system taken over by the Romans had been introduced by Philopator, assumes the historicity of 3 Maccabees (p. 437). The arguments of Anderson, "3 Maccabees," 511, that Jews could have suffered under "a castesystem of taxation" in the Ptolemaic period, are similarly hypothetical.


125

was written shortly after the introduction of this laographiaJ^ The fact that "political parity with the Alexandrians" is an issue in 3 Maccabees (2:30) further fits a setting in the Roman eraJ^ We should also note that the price of this parity is religious apostasy, as was also true for Jews who became full citizens in the Roman era. We should emphasize that the story was not all composed de novo in the Roman period. Rather, as Barclay has observed, "one has the impression of an author stitching together legends of varied origin, creating a patchwork of events which make no historical sense in this strange amalgam."^^ But the association of the laographia with a reduction in status betrays the hand of the editor who patched the story together. The reference to the laographia provides a terminus a quo for 3 Maccabees. As we have seen, the status of the Jewish community relative to the Greek citizens of Alexandria remained an issue, at least until the time of Claudius, and was at the heart of the disturbances in the reign of Caligula. The similarities between the situation envisaged In 3 Maccabees and that which existed in the time of Caligula are obvious and did not escape the older generation of scholars, although they have been overlooked in more recent w o r k s . F i r s t is the juxtaposition of an attempt to violate the Jerusalem temple and the threat to Egyptian Jewry. The only time when Judaism endured this particular combination of dangers was under Caligula. Since the apparent models for these two sections of 3 Maccabees — the episode of Heliodorus and the legend associated with Ptolemy Physcon in Josephus — were unrelated to each other, their combination is a significant clue to the setting of the final composition. It is true that 3 Maccabees inverts the order in which Philo treats the persecution and the temple episode,''^ but this may be explained by the dramatic conception of 3 Maccabees. The climax of the story is the attempt to annihilate Egyptian Jewry, and this is what leads to the definitive deliverance. Accordingly, it must conclude the book. Some details of the story seem applicable to Caligula, especially the hubris of the king and his periodic loss of rational control.''^ These details are not found in Jose70. So also Goodman, in Schiirer, The History of the Jewish People, 3.1:540; Paul, "Le Troisieme Livre des Macchabees," 332; Parente, "The Third Book of Maccabees," 171; Barclay, Jews in tiie Mediterranean Diaspora, 448 among others. 71. Tcherikover, "The Third Book," 11-18; Hadas, The Third and Fourth Books, 19-21. 72. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 195. 73. A setting under Caligula was proposed by H. Ewald, The Histoiy of Israel (8 vols.; trans. R. Martineau; London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1869-86) 5:468-73. So also H. Willrich, "Der historische Kern des III. Makkabaerbuches," Hermes 39 (1904) 244-58. 74. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 203, regards 3 Maccabees as prophetic: "the parallels between 3 Maccabees and the traumatic events of 38-41 C E indicate how nearly our author's nightmare became a reality." 75. Emmet, "The Third Book of Maccabees," 158. 76. Josephus, Ant. 19.1.1 §1 discusses the hybris and mania of Caligula. Cf. Philo, Legalio ad Gaium 162: "Gains grew beside himself with vanity, not only saying but thinking

126


phus's version of the story. This is not to say that 3 Maccabees is an allegory or coded history of the events of 38-41 C.E.'''' As we have seen, the stories are woven from traditional material and shaped by their own generic conventions. The suggestion is only that the crises in the time of Caligula may have provided the stimulus for putting the story together. Gruen asserts that no stimulus, either historical event or set of circumstances, was needed.''^ But the issues and pattern of relations depicted in the story seem to me to be more specific than this. This is not a timeless meditation on universal problems, such as we find in other Diaspora compositions like the Testament of Job or the Testament of Abraham. Even if we refrain from suggesting a more specific dating, we should at least recognize that the story fits the circumstances of the early Roman period (from the imposition of the laographia to the reign of Claudius) better than any other.^^ Only one aspect of 3 Maccabees may seem at first anomalous in relation to the situation in the early Roman period that came to a head in 38-41 C.E. The author Is at pains to exculpate "the Greeks": "The Greeks in the city, who were in no way injured, when they saw the unforeseen tumult. . . were not strong enough indeed to help them, for they lived under a tyranny, but they did try to comfort them and were distressed for them" (3:8-10). In fact, the Alexandrian Greeks were the most immediate and bitter enemies of the Jews. This was so not only in the time of CaUguIa but throughout the Roman period, and is problematic on any dating. It is unlikely that the author was unaware of the enmity of the Greeks. Rather, it would seem that he deliberately chose to portray them in the most positive light possible, choosing to refer the name Greeks to the "friends and business associates" who were well disposed to the Jews, rather than to the hostile mass. 3 Maccabees does not pretend that all the Gentiles were well disposed to the Jews. It refers to "the hatred which had long grown inveterate in their hearts" and was now given free expression. The author does not, however, specify just who those Gentiles were who hated the Jews. The usage of 3 Maccabees, which distinguishes between "the Greeks" and the Alexandrian enemies of the Jews, is in accordance with that of Philo that he was God." Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 225, objects that Philo did not hold Caligula responsible for the problems in Alexandria in In Flaccum, but Egyptian Jews can hardly have been unaware of the emperor's character. 77. Most of the objections to a date in the time of Caligula or shortly thereafter are based on the lack of detailed correspondences, which is readily admitted. See, e.g., Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 203; Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 225. 78. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 225. 79. Many scholars see the imposition of the laographia as the stimulus for the composition of 3 Maccabees. See Parente, The Third Book of Maccabees, 175-77. The portrayal of Augustus, however, is uniformly positive in Jewish sources. See, e.g., Philo, Legatio ad Gaium, 144-49, 157, and especially 159, where Philo claims that in Augustus's reign "the whole population of the empire, even if not instinctively well-disposed towards the Jews, was afraid to tamper with any Jewish practice in the hope of destroying it." See also Josephus. A^. Ap. 2.61.


127

and Josephus. Philo refers seathingly to the "promiscuous and unruly Alexandrian mob" {Legatio 120), but he does not call them "Greeks."^'^ On the contrary, he attributes their malice exphcitly to the Egyptian character {In Flaccum 29; cf. In Flaccum 17) and ridicules them for the Egyptian animal cults, which he regards simply as their religion {Legatio 139, 162, 165). Caligula's friend and adviser Helicon, who is said to be "from the most garrulous section of the Alexandrian population," is also leader of a band of "Egyptians, a worthless breed, whose souls were infected with the poison and bad temper alike of the crocodiles and asps of their country" {Legatio 166-70). The Jewish position on the conflict of the races in Alexandria is most clearly stated by Josephus {Ag. Ap. 2.68-70): The real promoters of sedition, as anyone can discover, have been the citizens of Alexandria of the type of Apion. The Greeks and Macedonians, so long as the citizenship was confined to them, never rose against us, but left us free to enjoy our ancient worship. But when, owing to the prevaihng disorders, their numbers were swelled by a host of Egyptians, sedition became chronic. Our race, on the contrary, remained unadulterated. It is they, then, who originated these disturbances, because the populace, possessing neither the Macedonians' strength of character nor the Greeks' sagacity, universally adopted the evil habits of the Egyptians and indulged their longstanding hatred of us. Accordingly, Josephus is at pains to establish that Apion and his ilk should be regarded as Egyptians rather than Greeks {Ag. Ap. 2.29-32, 34, 41, 66). The distinction of 3 Maccabees between "the Greeks" and those who hate the Jews is part of the standard Jewish apologetic. While this is primarily a matter of rhetoric, we need not assume that all Alexandrian Greeks were of Apion's ilk, and it is probable that at least upper-class Jews had friends and associates whom they did not wish to alienate. The attempt to exculpate "the Greeks" is highly significant for our understanding of the ideology of the work, as it shows that the author perceives no intrinsic enmity between the Jews and the Gentiles as such.^^ It is true that the prayers of Eleazar make a simple antithesis between Jews and Gentiles and speak of "the abominable and lawless nations" (6:9). Yet, it is not as80. Smallwood's translation of the Legatio is seriously misleading, as it often introduces the word Greeks where Philo does not supply the subject. 81. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 197, attempts to dismiss this exception to the "social antagonism" of 3 Maccabees by saying that it "is primarily a rhetorical ploy, and one which the author cannot weave convincingly into the pattern of the plot." Rhetorical ploy it may be, but it is integral to the picture of social relations painted by 3 Maccabees, and it is gratuitous to dismiss it.

128


sumed that all nations are lawless, only those who attack the Jews. Tcherikover, while recognizing the lack of hostility towards the Greeks, still refers to it as "hating the gentiles in general" and takes the book as a particular example of Jewish hatred against Rome, mainly because of the portrayal of the king.^^ This view is ill founded. Far from hating the Roman government and supporting a nationalist cause, 3 Maccabees insists that "the Jews continued to preserve their good will toward the royal house and their unswerving fidelity" (3:3), and in the end the king admits that he has no complaint against the Jews, "who have shown me and my ancestors full and firm loyalty in extraordinary measure" (5:31). The king's final change of heart and patronage of the Jews cannot simply be dismissed as a traditional ending which the author could not change.^' The traditional motif was retained because it expressed the Jews' enduring hope for good relations with their rulers, as they had enjoyed in the past. The reaffirmation of Jewish rights by Claudius gave substantial confirmation to this hope and provides a plausible background for the ideology of 3 Maccabees. The extremely negative portrayal of the king which predominates in 3 Maccabees does not reflect Jewish attitudes to all Gentile rulers but only to an exceptional case. By portraying the king as the instigator and prime cause of the Jewish troubles, 3 Maccabees is in fact isolating and restricting the enmity between Jews and Gentiles. Despite the inveterate hatred of some Gentiles for the Jews (4:1), they are not held responsible for the persecution, and the Jews express no desire for vengeance on them, in marked contrast to the earlier story of Esther. The crisis is ascribed to the mad insolence of an individual ruler and can be resolved when he passes away or comes to his senses.^* This construction of the situation would not have been an accurate analysis of the crisis in Alexandria in 38-41 C.E., but it is remarkably similar to that offered by Philo in his Legatio ad Gaium. There (in contrast to his In Flaccum), Philo attributes the disturbances to Caligula's self-deification. His religious demands lead to a confrontation with the Jews, and this provides an occasion for the hosdiity of the Alexandrians.^^ 3 Maccabees does not accuse Philopator of self-deification^^ but nonetheless traces the disturbance to his 82. Tcherikover, "The Third Book," 21; CPJ, 1:68. 83. So Tcherikover, "The Third Book," 21. 84. Cf. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 232: "The lesson of 111 Maccabees taught that the most trying circumstances, including even the malevolent lunacy of a ruler, should be reckoned as merely transient and ephemeral." 85. Smallwood, Legatio, 3. 86. Emmet ("The Third Book of Maccabees," 158) sees this as an objection to a date under Caligula, since the Ptolemies were theoi and so the issue of seJf-deification could have been worked in. However, self-deification was not the issue in the traditional source adapted by 3 Maccabees, but the cult of Dionysus. The author was not obliged to provide an exact correspondence to Caligula.


129

hubris. Again, religious demands are at the heart of the confrontation. 3 Maccabees, however, allows for final recovery on the part of the ruler. Caligula had no such happy ending. Not all the hostility of 3 Maccabees is directed toward the monarch. The Jews who voluntarily abandon the law are singled out for contempt (2:33) and eventual vengeance (7:10-16). Where the Jews in the story of Esther slaughter their Gentile enemies, in 3 Maccabees they kill more than three hundred apostates "with ignominy." There is no doubt that 3 Maccabees supports the strict observance of the Jewish law. No apology is made for the distinctive dietary observances, even if they appear odious to some. If Greek citizenship is offered in return for the worship of pagan gods, the choice is clear-cut. Those who accept are despised. The strict allegiance to the law is not based on any philosophical or strictly religious reasoning, but is rather a matter of ethnic solidarity, as is also the case in Esther: "they despised those who separated themselves from them, accounting them as enemies of their people and excluding them from social intercourse and the rendering of any service" (3:33). Yet this fidelity to the law and to distinctive Jewish identity is not seen as being in conflict with loyalty to the pagan rulers, even though it was so represented by their enemies (3:3-7). On the contrary, the king agrees that "those who had transgressed the divine commandments for their belly's sake would never be well disposed to the king's estate either" (7:11-12). Consequently we cannot accept Tcherikover's view that 3 Maccabees opposed "the official representatives of Alexandrian Judaism" by rejecting the aspiration to Greek citizenship as an avenue to apostasy.*'' The official representatives may not have sought citizenship but parity of privileges with the Greeks. What is rejected is citizenship at the price of apostasy. The author contends throughout that full observance of Jewish law is not only compatible with loyal service to Gentile rulers but, in the end, will win more respect than a compromising attitude. There is nothing to indicate that the position of 3 Maccabees was any different from that of Philo on this matter, although 3 Maccabees is more abrasive in its insistence on the distinctive aspects of Judaism and in its violence towards renegades. We may recognize here the attitude which provoked Apion's frustration: "Why then, if they are citizens, do they not worship the same gods as the Alexandrians?" (Ag. Ap. 2.65). It is also apparent that 3 Maccabees finds no incompatibility between loyalty to a Gentile ruler and its links with J e r u s a l e m . I n the Roman era, as 87. Tcherikover, "The Third Book," 23. 88. D. S. WiUiams, "3 Maccabees: A Defense of Diaspora Judaism," JSP 13 (1995) 1729, argues that 3 Maccabees was written "to defend Diaspora Jewry before Palestinian Jews." But there is httle to indicate Palestinian Jews as the primary audience, or indeed that such a defense would have been necessary.

130


in the time of Philopator, Egyptian and Palestinian Jews were subject to the same sovereign. The political scene was admittedly more complex in the Roman period, since an Alexandrian Jew had potentially three claims on his loyalty — Rome, Jerusalem, and Alexandria itself. 3 Maccabees, like the other Jewish writings of the period, has no place for Alexandrian nationalism. In this sense, Tcherikover is right to suggest that 3 Maccabees is not deeply rooted in its Egyptian setting.Loyalty to the sovereign is affirmed, but it is subordinated to the religious demands of the Jewish law. How far Jewish identity involves a link with Jerusalem is less clear. The prayer of Eleazar repeatedly refers to the present residence as a place of exile and says that the Jews are "strangers in a strange land" (6:3).^° He does not, however, pray for an end to his exile but asks God to remember them "in the land of their enemies" (6:15). The emphasis on the situation of exile reflects the realization that it was indeed the land of their enemies or, as Claudius put it in his letter, "a city which is not their own," but it does not express either a desire or an obhgation to return to Jerusalem. Rather, what is needed is effective protection from the Ptolemy or emperor. Again, there is no doubt that the author holds the Jerusalem temple in high esteem. The threat to the temple is a threat to Judaism itself because it symbolizes the special bond between God and Israel. The horror of 3 Maccabees at the prospect of profanation is paralleled by Philo's reacdon in the Legatio ad Gaium. The book does not, however, give any indication of the actual relations of Egyptian Jews to the temple. Inevitably, the temple could not play a great role in the practical religion of the Diaspora, despite the sending of offerings and the pilgrimages, which were undoubtedly common, although they are not noted here.^^ The practical allegiance of the Jews of Alexandria was to the law, which regulated their daily lives. Jerusalem and its temple had a less immediate role which was largely symbolic. The deliverance of the temple does not save Egypdan Jewry and, important though it is, it is not the climax of the story. Despite its greater emphasis on literal observance of the distinctive laws, the attitudes of 3 Maccabees are not very different from the so-called "apologetic" writings of Egyptian Judaism.^^ The main differences are due to 89. Tcherikover, "The Third Book," 25. 90. Ibid. Tcherikover also takes the v/ord paroikia in 7:19 as "exile" ("they determined to celebrate these days also as festive for the duration of their paroikia"). Hadas translates "community." 91. S. Safrai, "Relations between the Diaspora and the Land of Israel," in Safrai and Stem, eds.. The Jewish People in the First Century, 1:184-215; idem. "Pilgrimage to Jerusalem at the End of the Second Temple Period," in Studies on the Jewish Background of the New Testament (Assen: Van Gorcum, 1969) 12-21; idem, Wallfahrt in Zeitalter des Zweiten Tempels (Neukirchen-VIuyn: Neukirchener Verlag. 1981). 92. The parallels with the Letter of Aristeas have often been noted. See M. Hadas, "Aristeas and III Maccabees," HTR 42 (1949) 175-84. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 201-2, emphasizes the contrasts.


131

the crisis situation reflected in this book, but the manner in which the crisis is handled is designed to keep open a door to good relations with the Gentile w o r l d . 3 Maccabees also lacks the philosophical interests of Philo or even Pseudo-Aristeas, but on the other hand it is not so crude in its conceptions as Artapanus. In its own genre, it is well informed in Greek style and linguistic usage.^* It is not so obvious that the author must have come from the "common people," as Tcherikover held. Not all educated Alexandrian Jews were necessarily inclined to philosophy. The most striking features of the book are ultimately the willingness to excuse "the Greeks" and the merciless vengeance on the Jews who betrayed the solidarity with their people. The latter point was undoubtedly more conspicuous in the crises of the Roman era than it had ever been before in Egyptian Judaism.

Philo's Pontics Much of our knowledge of Egyptian Judaism in the early Roman period comes from Philo of Alexandria. Philo's view of Judaism lies outside the scope of the present study,^^ but we must briefly consider the light he throws on the political/ethnic understanding of Judaism in the Hellenistic Diaspora. There is no doubt that his own approach to Judaism was primarily philosophical and mystical. Political considerations have a subordinate place. Yet, they too are important and may be significant indicators of the common opinions of Alexandrian Jews who were less rarified in their philosophy.^^ Philo's interest in political affairs is evident from his participation in the embassy to Caligula.^'' Moreover, his brother, Alexander, and his nephew, Tiberius Julius Alexander, played leading roles in the political life of Alexandria.^^ His political interests were not unrelated to his philosophy. In the famous passage in De Migratione Abrahami 89-90 where he addresses the relation between allegorical and literal meaning, he criticizes those who overlook "all that the mass of men regard," and concern themselves only 93. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 233: "III Maccabees, in short, places its stress on concord, not antagonism," 94. Tcherikover, "The Third Book," 18-20. 95. See A. Mendelson, Pliilo's Jewish Identity (BJS 161; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1988); E, Bimbaum, The Place of Judaism in Philo's Thought: Israel, Jews, and Proselytes {Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1996). 96. For a comprehensive survey, see Barraclough, "Philo's Politics." 97. Josephus, Anr. 18.8.1 §§257-60. Smallwood, Legatio, 24-27. 98. On his brother, see Am. 20.5.2 §100; 18.6,3 §§159-60; 19.5,1 §276. Philo's nephew, Tiberius Julius Alexander, was Roman prefect in Egypt at the time of the Jewish revolt in 66 c . E . See CPJ, 1:78-79; and V. Burr, Tiberius Julius Alexander (Bonn: Habelt, 1955).

132


with allegorical meaning "as if they were disembodied souls." Instead, he insists that we should look on all these outward observances as resembling the body, and their inner meaning as resembling the soul. It follows that, exacUy as we have to take thought for the body, because it is the abode of the soul, so we must pay heed to the letter of the laws. If we keep and observe these, we shall gain a clearer conception of those things of which these are the symbols; and besides that we shall not incur the censure of the many and the charges they are sure to bring against us. (De Migratione Abrahami 93) The "letter of the laws" includes the distinctive Jewish rituals, but also the sanctity of the temple (which is mentioned explicitly in 92) and the eschatological promises of the scriptures. Philo's respect for the letter of the law is obviously not a result of his philosophy as such. Philo was an apologist for Judaism more profoundly than he was a philosopher. The entire structure of his writings is designed as an explanation of the Jewish scriptures, not as an independent philosophical quest. His loyalty to the letter of the law is partly due to an instinctive respect for tradition, partly to an appreciation of the need for concrete symbols on the part of the mass of humanity. It is, however, integrated into his philosophy as part of a sacramental thought structure whereby spiritual truths are mediated by visible endtles and practices. Philo's application of his philosophical principles to the polidcal realm is clearly evident in the Legatio ad Gaium. The survival of Judaism through the crises in Alexandria and Jerusalem is taken as proof of God's providential care for all humankind, but especially for "the race of suppliants" which is his particular concern. Israel Is, symbolically, the race of those "who see God." Its fate then symbolizes, and illustrates for the mass of humanity, God's care for those who lead spiritual lives. Philo's indignation at the attacks on the Jewish people and on its temple is no less than that of 3 Maccabees, but the motivation is quite different. For 3 Maccabees, as for the great majority of Jewish writers, the survival of the people and the glory of its temple are in themselves adequate goals of providendal design. For Philo they are symbols of a deeper spiritual concern which is the real focus of attention. The main question which arises In connection with Philo's politics, then, 99. Cf. P. Borgen, "There Shall Come Forth a Man: Reflections on Messianic Ideas in Philo," in J. H. Charlesworth, ed.. The Messiah: Developments in Early Judaism and Christianity (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992) 341-61: "Thus the literal and allegorical interpretations are interwoven, and the concrete national and 'messianic' eschatology and the general cosmic principles belong together" (p. 360). See also Borgen, "Philo of Alexandria," in Stone, ed., Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period, 233-80.


133

is how far his symbolism requires an exclusive exaltation of Judaism and its actual triumph over the Gentiles. The majority of scholars have tended to discount his interest in practical nationalism."^'^ While there is no doubt that he was concerned to ensure the survival of Judaism and its visible symbols, he did not necessarily share the aspirations to dominion, or even political independence, typical of Palestinian Judaism of the time. Yet, both Goodenough and Wolfson, the most influential students of Philo in this century, have argued, from different perspectives, that he fully shared the nationalistic hopes of Judaism, whatever significance he may have attached to them.'^' Goodenough's interpretation of Philo's politics is based on his interpretation of the portrayal of Joseph in De Somniis, which he reads as a veiled attack on Roman rule. Since Philo presents a positive assessment of Joseph in the De losepho, the negative critique in De Somniis is not simply the product of exegesis. It is indeed likely that Philo's portrayal is motivated by the excesses of Roman rule. In the Legatio ad Gaium and In Flaccum he is outspoken in condemning the "measureless excesses" of Rome's "lawless iniquities." Goodenough, however, claims more: that Philo passionately hated Roman rule as such and hoped for a militant messiah who would put an end to it. The key passage is De Somniis 2.63-64: And therefore the Holy Word did well in giving the name of Addition to one who was the enemy of simplicity and the friend of vanity. For just as we find on trees, to the great damage of the genuine growth, superfluities which the husbandmen purge and cut away to provide for their necessities, so the true and simple life has for its parasite the life of falsity and vanity, for which no husbandman has hitherto been found to excise the mischievous growth root and all. If this is an expression of messianic hope, it is indeed an indirect one, but Goodenough finds a clue to the indirectness of Philo's allegory in De Somniis 2.91-92: Do not we too, when we are spending time in the market-place, make a practice of standing out of the path of our rulers, and also of beasts 100. Barraclough, "Philo's Politics," 476-86; R. D. Hecht, "Philo and Messiah," in J. Neusner, W. S. Green, and E. Frerichs, eds., Judaisms and Their Messiahs at the Turn of the Christian Era (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987) 139-68, speaks of Philo's spiritualization and dehistoricization of the Messianic Era" (p. 161). 101. E. R. Goodenough, The Politics of Philo Judaeus (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1938); idem, Introduction to Philo Judaeus (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1940) 52-74; H. A. Wolfson, Philo: Foundations of Religious Pliilosophy in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam (2 vols.; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1947) 2:322-438. Cf. also J. M. Scott, "Philo and the Restoration of Israel," in E. Lovering, ed., SBL 1995 Seminar Papers (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1995) 553-75.

134


of carriage, though our motive in the two cases is entirely different? With the rulers it is done to show them honor, with the animals from fear and to save us from suffering serious injury from them. And if ever occasions permit it is good to subdue the violence of enemies by attack, but if they do not permit, the safe course is to keep quiet, and if we wish to gain any help from them the fitting course is to soften and tame them. Goodenough concludes that Philo "was no fanatic, and knew that so long as the Messiah had not yet come one must get on with the Romans in the most conciliating spirit possible. So Philo kept his messlanism to himself. But one could secretly think, hope, and hate. And Philo seems to me to be assuring his Jewish friends that he was passionately doing all three."•''^ Despite Philo's animated opposition to Roman oppression, the evidence does not indicate that he was opposed to Roman rule as such, or imbued with any hatred of Rome.^'*^ Even in his most polemical treatises, the Legatio ad Gaium and In Flaccum, Philo contrasts the abuses of power with the excellent administration of the past. Augustus is described as a virtual savior of the human race {Legatio 143-47) and the beginning of Caligula's reign as an "age of Cronos" {Legatio 13). Admittedly the quotation from De Somniis 2.91-92 may make any positive statements suspect as an attempt to "soften and tame" the Romans, but the fact that these praises are found in works which are so outspoken in criticism of Roman rulers tells against such a view. In a manner somewhat similar to 3 Maccabees, Philo seeks to contain the criticism of Roman rule by presendng the abuses as aberrations due to particular individuals. The reference in De Somniis 2.64 to a husbandman who will destroy the corrupdon "root and all" has often been taken as a reference to the messiah.^*"^ The passage is brief and ambiguous. Philo says only that "no husbandman has hitherto been found." We may infer that he expects one, but he does not actually say so. Such a "husbandman" could be a messianic figure who would put an end to Roman rule, or he might be a reformer who would put an end to corruption. In view of the unclarity of this passage, we must turn to the treatise De Praemiis et Poenis, where Philo addresses the subject of the future in far greater detail. In De Praemiis et Poenis 79-172 Philo presents an elaborate eschatological tableau which reaches its climax in 165-72. The eschatological bless102. Goodenough, Politics, 25. 103. So also Barraclough, "Philo's Politics," 449-75. 104. Goodenough, Politics, 25, calls attention to parallels in the Gospels: the announcement by John the Baptist that the axe is laid to the root of the tree (Matt, 3:10; Luke 3:9) and the analogy of the vine in John 15.


135

ings will include the reunion of the exiles, the prosperity of the land, the establishment of peace not only among men but also between men and beasts, and a sudden reversal of fortunes which will bring about the ruin of the enemies of the Jews. Wolfson concluded from this passage that "the solution found by Philo for the Jewish problem of his time was the revival of the old prophetic promises of the ultimate disappearance of the Diaspora."'^^ The "ideal polity" was to exist only in Palestine, because of the Deuteronomic insistence on a single temple.^'^^ While Philo envisaged the conversion of the G e n t i l e s , t h e eschatological Utopia is definitely Jewish. More clearly than in De Somniis, Philo here assigns a role to a messianic figure. "For 'there shall come forth a man' says the oracle, and leading his host to war he will subdue great and populous nations, because God has sent to his aid the reinforcement which befits the godly" (Praemiis et Poenis 95).''^^ Wolfson's interpretation, which seeks to assimilate Philo to what he regards as "native Judaism,"^''^ must be modified at several points. First, the dramatic reversal is contingent upon the repentance of the Jews and their "conversion in a body to virtue," which will "strike awe into their masters, who will set them free, ashamed to rule over men better than themselves" {Praemiis et Poenis 164). Philo is interested in the spiritual triumph of virtue rather than in the physical victory of a messianic king. Second, in most of the treatise Philo does not contrast Jews and Gentiles but the virtuous and the wicked. So the messianic "man" does battle not with the Gentiles but with "some fanatics whose lust for war defies restraint or remonstrance" {Praemiis et Poenis 94). Third, the distinction between the virtuous and the wicked does not fall exactly along ethnic lines. In Praemiis et Poenis 152 Philo contrasts the proselyte who "came over to the camp of God" with "the nobly

105. Wolfson, Philo. 2:407. 106. Ibid, 2:395. 107. De Vita Mosis 2.44: "But if a fresh start should be made to brighter prospects, how great a change for the better might we expect to see! 1 beheve that each nation would abandon its peculiar ways, and throwing overboard their ancestral customs, turn to honoring our laws alone." 108. See Wolfson. Philo 2:414-15. The scriptural quotation, from Num. 24:7 (the prophecy of Balaam), follows the LXX, which is quite different from the Hebrew. The only doubt as to whether Philo has a messianic "inan" in mind arises from the parallel passage in De Praemiis et Poenis 165 which says that the gathering of the exiles will be guided "by a vision divine and superhuman, unseen by others but manifest to them as they pass from exile to their home." If this passage refers to the Logos, as seems probable, then Philo may have identified the messiah with the Logos, and this identification may also be implicit in De Praemiis el Poenis 95. See J. de Savignac, "Le Messianisme de Philon d'Alexandrie," NovT4 (1960) 319-24; U. Fischer, Eschatologie und Jenseilserwartung im Hellenistischen Diasporajudentum (BZNW 44; Berhn: de Gruyter, 1978) 184-213. R Gregoire ("Le Messie chez Philon d'Alexandrie," ETL 12 [1935] 28-50) emphasizes that such interest in the messiah as we find in De Praemiis et Poenis is exceptional in Philo's works. 109. Wolfson, Philo, 2:415.

136


born who has falsified the sterling of his high lineage." God "welcomes the virtue which springs from ignoble birth" and "takes no account of the roots but accepts the full-grown stem." Finally, the physical rewards and punishments are only symbols of the spiritual. The "wild beasts in the soul" must be tamed before those of the forest (Praemiis et Poenis 88). Those who "possess stored up in heaven the true wealth whose adornment is wisdom and godliness have also wealth of earthly riches in abundance" {Praemiis et Poenis 104). For Philo the "matter" of earthly kingdoms is "nothing," only "a shadow or a breath which flits past."^^*' Its importance lies in its symbolic power to indicate another realm.^^' In short, Philo's eschatological tableau is viewed from a very different perspecdve from the concrete nationalism of Wolfson's "native Judaism." Yet he does speak of a gathering in of the exiles and overthrow of the enemies of Judaism; and the virtuous, while not simply the Jews by birth, are at least the Jews by practice of the law. In view of Philo's insistence on the value of concrete entities and the letter of the law as a basis for symbolism, we may ask whether he did not, after all, expect a visible triumph of Judaism. The political dimension in Philo's eschatology cannot be completely dismissed. He does, in fact, read the blessings and curses of Deuteronomy and Leviticus as predictions of a definitive eschatological upheaval, when they could have been taken in a less final sense. This fact at least indicates that he was familiar with political eschatology and assumed that some scriptural passages should be read that way. In his desire to be faithful to the letter of the law, he did in fact maintain the belief in the eventual disappearance of the Diaspora. Where Philo's eschatology differs from that of many apocalyptic writers and from that of most of the sibylline books is not so much in the actual concepts as in the degree of urgency. The paucity of references to national eschatology shows that it was not at the heart of his thought. Philo speaks of Jerusalem as the metropohs of the Jews, but he admits that "they severally hold that land as their fatherland . . . in which they were born and reared" (In Flaccum 46).^^'^ Philo is eager to establish the rights of the Jews in the lands 110. Quod Deus Immutabilis Sit, 172-77. This passage is remarkable for its review of world kingdoms, reminiscent of apocalyptic literature and the Sibylline Oracles. A similar passage is found in De losepho 131-37. 111. Fischer, Eschatologie, 187-210, notes the limitations of Philo's interest in national and poHtical eschatology and stresses the persistent emphasis on individual virtue, which he says is closer to Stoic than to Hebraic ethics. By stressing the individualized eschatology of De Praetniis et Poenis 152 as a focal point of the treatise, Fischer questions whether Philo is interested in national eschatology except as an allegory for individual psychology. While many of Fischer's observations are valid, he underestimates Philo's respect for the letter of the law. 112. See further I. M. Gafni, Land, Center, and Diaspora: Jewish Constructs in Late Antiquity (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997) 41-49 ("At Home While Abroad: Expressions of Local Patriotism in the Jewish Diaspora of Late Antiquity").


137

in which they are "settlers and friends, eagerly seeking equality of privilege with burgesses and already being near in status to citizens, differing but little from natives" (De Vita Mosis 1.35). Attainment of rights in Alexandria is far higher on Philo's agenda than return to Jerusalem. Again, the temple is of vital importance, and any threat to it is a threat to Judaism itself. There is some evidence that Philo may have made the pilgrimage to Jerusalem."^ Yet the real significance of the temple is allegorical, in its symbolism of cosmic worship. It is necessary that there be a temple as a visible sign, to convey the symbolism to the masses, but it is not necessary that Philo, or other spiritually minded Jews, live in proximity to it or go there frequently. The urgent needs of the religion lie elsewhere. Jerusalem and the homeland remain very much in the background of Philo's thought. They are essential to Jewish identity, but they do not normally interfere with the life of the Diaspora Jew in his own environment.^'^ The fact that Philo still finds some place for national eschatology indicates that messianic beliefs must have been widespread in his time, even in Egyptian Judaism.''^ In the case of Num. 24:7, the oracle of Balaam used by Philo in De Praemiis, the messianic note had already been introduced by the Septuagint translators.'*'' To say that messianic ideas were widespread is not, however, to suggest that they were held with intensity or that there was significant messianic agitation. While one of the messianic pretenders mentioned by Josephus was from Egypt,'^^ we hear of no messianic movement in Egypt until the Diaspora revolt under Trajan. One of the factors which led to the riots of 38 C.E. was the visit of King Agrippa to Alexandria. The Greeks reacted to this by holding a demonstration in mockery in which they dressed up a madman named Carabas and hailed him as Marin, "the name by which it is said that kings are called in 113. J. Jeremias, Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus {Philadelphia: Fortress, 1969) 69 n. 13, who cites a fragment of De Providentia preserved in Eusebius, Praep. Evang. 7.14.64. The authenticity of the fragment is not fully certain. 114. H. Wenschkewitz, Die Spiriiualisierung der Kultus Begriffe (Leipzig: Pfeiffer, 1932); U. Fruchtel, Die Kosmologischen Vorsteltungen bei Philo von Alexandrien (Leiden: Brill, 1968) 69-118. 115. Accordingly, Scott, "Philo and the Restoration of Israel," 562-66, goes too far when he attributes to Philo a "negative view of the Diaspora." 116. So F. Dexinger, "Ein 'Messianisches Szenarium' als Gemeingut des Judentums in nachherodianischer Zeit?" Kairos 17 (1975) 250-55. See now J. J. Collins, The Scepter and the Star: The Messiahs of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Ancient Literature (New York: Doubleday, 1995). Hecht, "Philo and Messiah," argues that Philo's generally spiritualizing philosophy serves to neutralize messianic expectations. 117. On the question of eschatological references in the LXX, see further P. Volz, Die Eschatologie der jiidischen Gemeinde (Tubingen: Mohr, 1934) 183; L. Prijs, Jiidische Tradition in der LXX (Leiden: Brill, 1948) 67-75; J. Schaper, Eschatology in the Greek Psalter (Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1995). 118. Josephus, Am. 20.8.6 § § 1 6 7 - 7 2 ; 2 . 1 3 . 5 §§261-63.

138


Syria."^'^ The point at issue was that Agrippa was a Jewish king. If the Alexandrian mockery is assumed to reflect the claims of the Jews, we might suspect that the king's visit had kindled a flame of Jewish messianism. In fact, there is no doubt that the Jews were proud that Agrippa was a Jewish king. They did not, however, look for him to overthrow the Romans or liberate the Jews but only to intercede with Gaius for the protection of Jewish rights.^2"* The friction with the Greeks was not due to any desire to end the Diaspora, but to the determination to maintain Jewish identity even in exile.

T h e Events of 66-73 C.E. The Jews of the Diaspora did not join in the revolt of 66-70, but there was trouble in Alexandria in 66 C.E.^^^ When the Greek population was holding a meeting concerning an embassy to Nero, some Jews mingled with them in the amphitheater. They were detected, and three of them were captured and burned alive. This outraged the Jewish population, which proceeded to riot. The outbreak was brought to an end when Tiberius Alexander, Philo's nephew, who was governor of the city, "let loose upon them the two Roman legions stationed in the city together with two thousand soldiers, who by chance had just arrived from Libya to complete the ruin of the Jews; permission was given them not merely to kill the rioters but to plunder their property and burn down their houses." The Jews "offered a prolonged resistance," but "wholesale carnage ensued" (J.W. 2.18.8 §§494-95). Josephus relates this incident to the earUer tensions between Jews and Greeks in the city. While the purpose of the embassy to Nero is not stated, it was presumably concerned with the status of the Jews in some way, whence the interest of the Jews in infiltrating the meeting. But while the incident may have begun as a conflict between Jews and Greeks, the primary agents of destruction were the Romans. Despite the fact that the governor himself was of Jewish stock, it was at this juncture that the Roman army was first "let loose" on the Jews of Alexandria. Josephus is at some pains to present Tiberius as reasonable and moderate. At first he "attempted to recall them to reason without recourse to arms," and at the end he was moved to compassion and ordered the Romans to retire. The Romans withdrew at once, but the Alexandrians were not so easily called off. Yet Josephus cannot hide the brutality with which the revolt was suppressed. It Is possible that Tiberius protected some of the upper-class 119. In Flaccum 25-42. Smallwood, Legatio, 18-19; eadem, The Jews. 238-39. 120. Smallwood, The Jews, 238-39. 121. J.W. 2.18.7-8 §§487-98; CPJ. 1:78-79; Smallwood, The Jews, 364-66; Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 185-90.


139

Jews such as the members of the gerousia, or council of the elders, since we find this body still in control of the Jewish community in the events of 73 c . E . T h e governor's handling of the situation may, of course, have been influenced by the contemporary events in Palestine, although there is nothing to indicate that the Egyptian Jews intended to revolt against Rome. The severe blow dealt to the Jewish community in 66 C.E. was not fatal. When Titus visited Alexandria in 71 C.E., the Greeks requested that he disband the Jewish politeuma, but he refused and reaffirmed Jewish rights. The gerousia continued to function and played a decisive role in averting another outbreak in 73 c.E. A group of Slcarii who had fled to Egypt "sought to induce many of their hosts to assert their independence, to look upon the Romans as no better than themselves and to esteem God alone as their lord."'^"* They murdered some of the leading Jews who opposed them, but the gerousia prevailed on the Jewish population to hand them over to the Romans. According to Josephus, six hundred were captured on the spot and others who had fled into Egypt were arrested and brought back. They were then tortured and executed. From the episode of 73 C.E. we may infer that the more prominent members of the Jewish community were more loyal to the Romans than the lower classes. This is only to be expected, since they obviously had more to lose in a rebellion. Yet the Sicarii could not find enough popular support to withstand the gerousia. Perhaps chastened by the events of 66 and the outcome of the war in Judea, the Jewish community of Alexandria had no appetite for rebellion. Despite the collaboration of the Jewish leaders to an extreme and shameful degree on this occasion, the Romans were not impressed with their loyalty. Rather, "suspicious of the interminable tendency of the Jews to revolution," they proceeded to close up the temple at Leontopolis.'^^ The Jews of the Diaspora were all liable for the fiscus Judaicus. The didrachmon or half-shekel previously paid to the temple of Jerusalem was now paid to Rome, initially to defray the expenses of rebuilding the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus. Since this tax was levied on both sexes, three years and over, including slaves, and was added to the various other taxes of Roman Egypt, it amounted to a considerable burden.'^^ The betrayal of the Sicarii in Alexandria is the first overt division in the 122. CPJ, 1:79. 123. Ant. 12.3.1 § 121, The people of Antioch made a similar request which was also denied. Smallwood, The Jews, 366. 124. J.W. 7.10.1 §§409-19; CPJ, 1:79-80; Smallwood, The Jews, 366-67. 125. J.W. 7.10.2-4 §§420-36, The closing of the temple by Lupus had to be repeated by his successor Paulinus. 126. The Jewish tax had been levied only on men, between the ages of 20 and 50. It appears that women were exempted from xh^ fiscus Judaicus at age 62, but we know of no age limit for men. See Smallwood, The Jews, 371-76; CPf 1:80-82.

140


Egyptian Jewish community for reasons of social class. A similar class conflict is reflected in an episode at Cyrene about the same time.'^^ A weaver named Jonathan, who had taken refuge in the town "won the ear of not a few of the indigent class, and led them forth into the desert, promising them a display of signs and apparitions." Although Josephus refers to Jonathan and his followers as Sicarii, his conduct resembles rather that of the messianic prophets such as Theudas or the prophet from Egypt, who were not militant revolutionaries but visionaries hoping for miracles. His exodus to the desert escaped notice, but "the men of rank among the Jews of Cyrene" reported his activities to the governor, Catullus. Catullus overpowered the crowd, slaughtered many, and took Jonathan prisoner. Now, with a fine Irony, Jonathan claimed he had received instructions from the wealthiest of the Jews. Catullus exploited the situation and had Jonathan accuse all the well-to-do Jews, three thousand In all, according to Josephus. He confiscated their property to the imperial exchequer and had them killed. The scheme came to an end when the accusations were extended to prominent Jews in Rome and elsewhere, including Josephus. Vespasian then made an Inquiry. Jonathan was tortured and burned alive, but Catullus was only reprimanded. The division between the Jewish upper and lower classes emerges in the context of the revolt against Rome. The upper classes had too much to lose and inevitably incurred the resentment of the revolutionaries. The episode in Cyrene especially shows the vulnerability of the Jews. No matter how either Jonathan or the wealthy Jews cooperated with the Romans, they were not safe. Since Vespasian was concerned to consolidate his empire, the governor could act with virtual impunity. As a result, both the upper class and the revolutionary element were wiped out. The latter was the more easily replaced. The removal of the Jewish upper class in Cyrene may have contributed eventually to the spread of the revolt under Trajan, since there was now no restraining element within the Jewish community.

T h e Background of the Great Revolt We have little direct evidence of the relations between Jews, Greeks, and Romans between 73 and 115 C.E. The Acra Hermaisci, in the Acts of the Alexandrian Martyrs, tells of a confrontation between Greek and Jewish embassies before Trajan. In accordance with the genre of the Alexandrian 127. J.W. 7.11.1-4 §§437-53. S. Applebaum, Jews and Greeks in Ancient Cyrene (SJLA 28; Leiden: Brill, 1979) 220-25. 128. CPJ. 2:82-87 (no. 157); Musurillo, The Acts of the Pagan Martyrs. 44-48; Smallwood, The Jews, 389-92; Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt. 191-97.


141

acts, the emperor is represented as heavily biased in favor of the Jews. The account is highly fictional but may be taken to indicate the persistence of the old conflicts between Greeks and Jews. This traditional animosity is hardly sufficient to account for the revolt which spread through the Diaspora in 11517 c.E. This crucial chapter in the history of the Jewish Diaspora is very poorly d o c u m e n t e d . E v e n the sequence of events is not entirely clear. There was an outbreak of fighting in Alexandria in 115 C.E. which is known from a papyrus containing what appears to be an edict of the governor of Egypt.'^" The papyrus says that a judge came from Rome to investigate this incident, and the governor warns the Jews not to disturb the peace. It would seem that this incident followed the traditional pattern of friction between Jews and Greeks in Alexandria. It also appears, however, that this incident was isolated and was not the spark of the wider revolt, which broke out in Cyrene and Cyprus. The main conflict in Egypt developed when the rebels from Cyrene invaded the Egyptian countryside. The Alexandrian Jews were then drawn into the conflict when the Greeks who had fled from the countryside attacked them, and a particularly destructive struggle ensued. According to some medieval sources, the Jews of Cyrene eventually penetrated Judea and were crushed by Lusius Quietus, but this stage of the revolt is extremely obscure.'^' There was some fighting in Palestine, known as the "War of Quietus" in Jewish tradition.'^^ The revolt was especially destructive, and the wrath of the Jews was directed against pagan temples in particular. Casualties of the violence included the Ptolemaic Sarapeum and the largest Jewish synagogue in Alexandria. The terror inspired by the revolt is aptly expressed in the prayer of a Greek mother for her son "that they may not roast you."'^^ In the end, the Jewish population was decimated, and some of those who survived lost their 129. The main account is that of Eusebius, Hisl. Eccl. 4.2.1-4. Also Die Cassius 68.32; Appian, Bella Civilia 2.90 (Appian witnessed the revolt himselO; Orosius 7.12; Syncellus 347d, 348d. There is also a brief notice in the Armenian version of Eusebius's Chronica. See CPJ. 1:86-93; Smallwood, The Jews, 393-427; A. Fuks, "Aspects of the Jewish Revolt in A . D . 115-117," 7^5 51 (1961) 98-104; Applebaum, Jews and Greeh, 242-344; Schurer, The History of the Jewish People, 1:529-34; M. Hengel, "Messianische Hoffnung und politischer 'Radikalismus' in der jiidisch-hellenistischen Diaspora," in D. Hellholm, ed.. Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East (Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1983) 653-84; A. Kasher, "A Comment on the Jewish Uprising in Egypt during the Days of Trajan," JJS 27 (1976) 147-58; Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 198-205. 130. CPJ, 2:228-33 (no. 435); Applebaum, Jews and Greeks, 266-67. 131. Applebaum, Jews and Greeks, 303. The authorities are Bar Hebraeus and Michael Syriacus. 132. Applebaum, Jews and Greeks, 303. Quietus had already suppressed the Jews in Mesopotamia. 133. CPJ, 2:236 (no. 437). The papyri relevant to the revolt are collected in CPJ, 2:22560.

142


property. The Jews were no longer allowed to live in Alexandria but were given a settlement just outside it, although even this drew objections from the Greeks. It appears from the Acts of the Alexandrian Martyrs that Jewish and Greek deputadons appeared before Hadrian after the end of the revolt and traded charges about the whole series of disturbances, but the Acr^, as always, is unreliable in its details. The surviving accounts of the revolt give no rational explanation of why it started. The Jews rose "as If mad," according to Orosius, or "as if in the grip of some terrible spirit of rebellion" (Eusebius). Modem authors have often suggested that the revolt had no more specific cause than the intensity of messianic expectation.'^^ The emergence of a "king," whose name is variously given as Lukuas (Eusebius) or Andreas (Dio),'^^ lends some support to such an idea. The revolt had evidently a strong religious dimension, as can be seen from the destruction of the pagan t e m p l e s . W e have seen above that messianic ideas were current in the dme of Philo. Yet there was little support for messianic or nadonaUstic movements before 115, as can be seen from the treatment of the Sicarii in Alexandria and Cyrene. A number of factors may have inclined the Diaspora Jews more strongly towards messianism in the period after 70 than had previously been the case. One was the fiscus Judaicus, which not only branded all Jews as seditious people but also imposed a considerable financial burden. Applebaum considers "agrarian factors," including excessive taxation, as a factor in the revolt. The acknowledged abuses of the tax, especially under Domitian,^^^ could not fail to arouse resentment against Rome. The destruction of the temple was itself an event of great symbolic significance. There was an influx of Jewish prisoners to Egypt, for compulsory work or for sale as slaves.^"^^ These people had ample reason for anti-Roman feeling. The role of the Roman legion in the Alex134. CPJ, 2:95 (no. 158a, col. 6). 135. CPJ, 2:87-99 (The Acta Pauli et Antonini); Musunllo, The Acts of the Pagan Martyrs, 179-94, Smallwood, The Jews, 406-9. 136. SoM. J. Lagrange, Le Messianisme chez les Juifs (Paiis: Gabalda, 1909) 308; Fuks, "Aspects," 98-104; CPJ, 1:90; Applebaum, Jews and Greeks, 260; Hengel, "Messianische Hoffnung." 137. It is not even certain that one individual is meant. CPJ, 2:94 (no. 158a, col. I) refers enigmatically to "the king of the scene and the mime." It would appear that the Alexandrians had staged a mockery of the Jewish "king" as they had of Agrippa in the time of Caligula. 138. The Egyptian reaction also drew on religious motivations. See D. Frankfurter, "Lest Egypt's City Be Deserted: Religion and Ideology in the Egyptian Response to the Jewish Revolt, 116-117 C E , " JJS 43 (1992) 203-20. 139. Applebaum, Jews and Greeks, 328-31. 140. Suetonius, Domitian 12.2. The elimination of these abuses under Nerva was commemorated by a Roman coin (CPJ, 1:80). 141. CPJ, 1:85. Josephus (J.W. 6.9.2 §418) mentions that prisoners were sent in chains to the works in Egypt while those under 17 were sold. Jerome (Comm. in Jerem. 31.15 [PL 24.877]) says that "infmita millia captivorum" were sent to Rome via Gaza and Alexandria.


143

andrian disturbances of 66 was surely remembered. Tcherikover cites the "steady increase in the use of Hebrew names from the Ptolemaic to the Roman period" as evidence for "the gradual increase of national spirit among the Egyptian Jews."'^^ The involvement of Trajan in a Parthian war, and the transfer of some forces from Egypt to the East, provided an occasion for revolt against Rome.'"*^ The increase in messianic fervor went hand in hand with the deterioration of Jewish life in Egypt, because of taxation among other things, and with the influx of prisoners and refugees from Judea. Only now do we find a real attempt to abandon the Diaspora and return to the land of Israel. The progress of Lukuas and his followers through Egypt, and if the late reports are correct, into Judea, has eschatological overtones of the return of the exiles. The farreaching destruction is indicative of the abandonment of the Diaspora.'^'* It is significant that the Jews of Alexandria were drawn into the revolt late and even then were not firm allies of the rebels. Eusebius says that the rebels "lost the alliance" of the Alexandrian Jews.'"*^ The spirit which motivated the revolt was very different from that of the Jews who had struggled for status in the mid-first century C.E. and drew its vigor from a different social class.

The Fifth Sibyl We have only one document which may reflect the attitudes of Egyptian Judaism in the period leading up to the revolt. The Fifth Sibylline Oracle is made up of six oracles or collections of oracles.'*^ The first, verses 1-51, reviews history from Alexander to Hadrian (or, if vs. 51 be original, Marcus Aurelius) and constitutes an introduction to the book. The next four oracles, verses 52-110, 111-78, 179-285, and 286-434, show a common pattern of (a) oracles against various nations; (b) an eschatological adversary, who evokes the figure of Nero with varying degrees of clarity in the different oracles; (c) the advent of a savior figure; and (d) destruction (usually by fire). Verses 435-530 constitute a concluding oracle which is largely concerned 142. CPl 1:84. 143. Smallwood, The Jews, 394. 144. J. M, ScoU, "Exile and the Self-Understanding of Diaspora Jews," in idem, ed.. Exile: Old Testament, Jewish, and Christian Perceptions (Leiden: Brill, 1998) 173-218, sees this as the culmination of the Diaspora experience, but there is little evidence of a realistic desire to return before 70 c . E . 145. Hist. Eccl. 4.2.3. Applebaum, Jews and Greeks, 295. 146. J. J. Collins, The Sibylline Oracles of Egyptian Judaism (SBLDS 13; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1974) 73-76; Goodman, in Schiirer, The History of the Jewish People 3.1:644; H. Merkel, Die Sibyllinen (JSHRZ 5.8; Gutersloh: Mohn, 1998) 1065-68.

144


with Egypt and which concludes with an elaborate battle of the stars (51231). Only one passage, verses 256-59, reflects ChrisUan redaction, and even there it is probable that an original Jewish passage has only been modified by an allusion to the crucifixion. It is unlikely that all of Sib. Or. 5 was composed at the same dme. The prominence of the Nero legend requires a date no earlier than 70 C.E. but more probably later than 80. At the other extreme, the favorable reference to Hadrian in verses 46-50 must have been written before the revolt of 132 C.E. The bitterness of complaint about the destrucdon of the temple, especially in verses 398-413, suggests that at least the central oracles were not too far removed in time from that event. It seems likely that the greater part of Sib. Or. 5 comes from the period between 70 and 115 C.E., ahhough the introduction, and possibly the conclusion, is later. It is significant that the sibyl speaks more than once of the destrucdon or dereliction of pagan temples (vss. 5259, 484-91).'*^ Destruction of temples was a noteworthy feature of the revolt. The allusion to the overthrow of Sarapis in the concluding oracle (vs. 487) may reflect the destrucdon of the Ptolemaic Sarapeum. The atdtude of Sib. OK 5 to the GenUle nations is far more negative than anything in the earlier sibylline tradidon. Only in the introductory oracle does the sibyl find something positive to say about any Gendle ruler. Two of the four central oracles (vss. 52-110 and 179-285) are dominated by prophecies of the destruction of Egypt. Not only does the sibyl repeat the familiar denunciadons of Egypdan idolatry and theriolatry (Sib. Or 5:77-85; cf. Sib. OK 3:30-33; Wisdom of Solomon 13-15), but she also denounces Egypt "because you have raged against my children . . . and incited evil against good men" (vss. 67-68). Undoubtedly, the Alexandrians, who were the most immediate adversaries of the Jews, are included in the Egyptians here. The most bitter words of the sibyl, however, are directed against Rome. Like Babylon in the Old Testament (which is invoked in Sib. Or 5 as a type of Rome),'"*^ Rome had said, "I alone am and no one wilt ravage me."^"*^ This blasphemous pretension to divinity is typified by Nero and is the ultimate sin in the biblical tradition. In more specific terms, Rome is denounced for immoraUty (vs. 166), a charge familiar from the earliest strata of the sibylline oracles. More significandy, it was Rome which destroyed Jerusalem (vss. 160-61) and was thereby established as the new Babylon. Sibylline Oracle 5 was not the first outburst of sibylline fury against 147. Collins, The Sibylline Oracles, 94-95. The point is also noted by Hengel, "Messianische Hoffnung," 668-74. 148. Sib. Or. 5:143, 159. Cf. the use of Babylon for Rome in Revelation 13; 17; 18; 2 Baruch 36-40; 4 Ezra 11-12. 149. Sib. Or. 5:173; Isa. 47:8. Collins, The Sibylline Oracles, 79.


145

Rome. A powerful oracle preserved in Sib. Or. 3:350-80 promises that "however much wealth Rome received from ttibute-bearing Asia, Asia will receive three times that much again from Rome, and will repay her deadly arrogance to her." The oracle goes on to say that a mistress (despoina) will cut your delicate hair, and dispensing justice, will cast you from heaven to earth, but from earth will raise you up to heaven." The sibyl goes on to predict a time when "serene peace will return to the Asian land, and Europe will then be blessed." All commentators have dated this oracle to the first century B.C.E. The despoina may be Asia personified, in which case the oracle can be plausibly associated with the campaign of Mithridates.'^'* Alternatively, the despoina may be Cleopatra as the goddess Isis, whose conflict with Rome at Actium was often presented as a war between Europe and Asia.'^' The emphasis on Rome's predatory taxation fits better with the context of Mithridates, but the vision of a harmonious future, where Rome is again raised up to heaven, fits the ideology of Cleopatra. In either case, the oracle is not necessarily Jewish, but is picked up in a collection of pagan sibylline oracles that lend authenticity to the pseudepigraphie Jewish composition. What is most remarkable in contrast to Sib. Or 5 is the harmonious conclusion of the older oracle. The destruction of Rome is also predicted in Sib. Or. 3:46-62 in an oracle that dates to a time shortly after the battle of Actium ("when Rome will also rule over Egypt"). This oracle, however, does not develop charges against Rome and can be understood in light of the common sibylline theme of the destruction of all human kingdoms. It has been suggested that Rome is also the "widow" who reigns over the whole world and brings it to desolation in Sib. Or. 3:75-92,'^^ but in that case the reference is uncertain. The explicit statement that "then indeed the world will be governed under the hands of a woman" suggests the reign of an actual woman, most plausibly C l e o p a t r a . I n any case, none of these passages develops the kind of invective against Rome that we find in Sib. Or. 5. Another sibylline book. Sib. Or 11, a chronicle of history that concludes with the Roman conquest of Egypt, shows no animosity against 150. H. G. Kippenberg, " 'Dann wird der Orient Herrschen und der Okzident Dienen': Zur Begrundung eines gesamtvorderasiatischen Standpunktes im Kampf gegen Rom," in N. W. Bolz and W. HUbener, eds., Spiegel und Gleichnis: Festschrift ftir Jacob Taubes (Wtirzburg: Konigshausen und Neumann, 1983) 40-48. The association with Mithridates was proposed by Johannes Geffcken. 151. E.g., Philo, Legaf/o 144. For the identification with Cleopatra, see W. W. Tarn, "Alexander Helios and the Golden Age," JRS 22 (1932) 135-59; Collins, The Sibylline Oracles, 57-64. Merkel, Sibyllinen. 1062, allows that the reference may be either to Mithridates or to Cleopatra. 152. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 286. 153. Collins, The Sibylline Oracles. 66-70. So also Goodman, in Schurer, The History of the Jewish People, 3.1:641. The oracles mSib. Or 3:46-62 and 75-92 are generally regarded as part of the lost Sib. Or. 2, a different collection of oracles from the one that begins in Sib. Or 3:97.

146


Rome and seems rather to rejoice in the subjugation of Egypt.^^'* Opposition to Rome was not endemic to Jewish sibylline oracles. Rome is raised to a mythological level in the sibyl's use of Nero as an eschatological adversary. Drawing on the popular legend that Nero had not died but had fled to Parthia and would one day return, the sibyl presents him both as king of Rome (vs. 138) and as leading an attack on Rome in the eschatological period (vs. 367). He is not yet idendfied with Belial, as he is in the, Ascension of Isaiah (4:1) and probably in Sib. Or. 3:63-74,'^^ or said to return from the dead as in Reveladon,^^^ but he sdll approximates to the scale of an Antichrist figure. His evil character corresponds direcUy to that of Rome: he Is morally evil, responsible for the destrucdon of Jerusalem (since the Jewish war began in his reign), and claims to be god (vss. 34, 139-40). The hosdiity of the sibyl to Rome does not entail any endorsement of Rome's enemies. Unlike Sib. Or 3:350-80, which had enthusiastically looked for the subjection of Rome to Asia, Sib. Or. 5 has no positive counterpart to Rome. Prophecies of destruction against Asia alternate with those against Egypt (vss. 111 -36, 286-327). The main enemies of Rome in this period, the Parthians, are closely linked with Nero. In fact, Nero would seem to be "the Persian" or "the one who obtained the land of the Persians" (vss. 93, 101; in vs. 147 he is said to have gone to the Persians). Both Rome and the Parthians are seen as near-diabolical powers in Sib. Or 5, irrespective of their mutual r e l a t i o n s . T h e general xenophobia of the sibyl is perhaps best

154. Collins, "Tlie Sibylline Oracles," in OTP, 1:430-42. Some scholars date Sib. Or. 11 to the third century c.E., because of its resemblance to books 12-13, but nothing in the book requires a date later than the reign of Augustus. The uncertainty about the date is due to doubt over whether the present division of books reflects the original units of composition. 155. Pace Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 285-86, who finds an anti-Roman leitmotiv already in Sib. Or. 3. 156. Collins, The Sibylline Oracles, 80-87. On the Nero legend in the Sibylline Oracles, see also L. Kreitzer, "Hadnan and the Nero Redivivus Myth," ZNW 79 (1988) 92-115; G. C. Jenks, The Origin and Early Development of the Antichrist Myth (BZNW 59; Berlin:- de Gruyter, 1991) 257-67; B. McGinn, Antichrist: Two Thousand Years of the Human Fascination with Evil (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1994) 45-53; L, C. L. Peerbolte, The Antecedents of Antichrist (Leiden: Brill, 1996) 322-34. 157. 'Then Beliar will come from the Sebastenoi" (ek Sebaslendn). This line is often taken to mean that Beliar will come from Samaria. The parallel with Asc. Isa. 4:1, however, where Beliar is clearly identified with Nero, suggests that ek Sebastenon means "from the line of the Augusti." See Collins, The Sibylline Oracles. 86. 158.Rev. 13:3; 17:8, 11. A. Yarbro Collins, T/ie Combat Myth in the Book of Revelation (HDR 9; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1976) 170-86. 159. Contrast the prediction of R. Simeon b. Yohai (mid-second century): "If you see a Persian horse tethered in Israel, look for the coming of the Messiah" (Midrash Song of Songs Rabbah viii, 9 § 3; Lamentations Rabbah i, 13 § 41). See J. Neusner, A History of the Jews in Babylonia (2d ed. Leiden: Brill, 1965) 74-76; Smallwood, The Jews, 426. Smallwood's contention that "Palestinian Jews looked upon the Parthians... as potential saviors" lacks documentation for the first century.


147

illustrated in its strange allusions to the "Ethiopians." In verses 206-13 the Indians and Ethiopians are warned of a coming conflagration. Since only the land of the Ethiopians is said to be destroyed, the Indians and the Ethiopians appear to be identified here, a confusion that is also attested elsewhere in ancient geographers.'**^ Then in the concluding oracle, the final conflagration is precipitated by the Ethiopians, who "leave the shameless tribes of the Triballi," launch on a course of wickedness, and destroy the (mysterious) temple which will have been erected to the true God in the land of Egypt. Then God will rain on them a terrible wrath. This passage makes even less geographical sense than verses 206-13. The Triballi were a tribe in Thrace. Sib. OK 5 may be influenced by Sib. Or. 3:319-20, where Gog and Magog are located between the Ethiopian rivers, so that the Ethiopians now become a general and vaguely conceived eschatological adversary. What is noteworthy is the willingness of the sibyl to regard a remote nation, whose location was not even known clearly, in such a hostile way. The bitterness of the sibyl against Rome does not displace the enmity towards Egypt. Two of the four central oracles are devoted to Egypt, and the sibyl complains of Egyptian hostility to the Jews. Again, the final oracle prophesies the overthrow of Isis and Sarapis. Yet, the final oracle also holds out the prospect of the conversion of Egypt to the one true god, even though this is brought to naught by the invasion of the Ethiopians. No such prospect is ever held out for Rome. Rome clearly supersedes Egypt and the Egyptian Greeks as the primary enemy of the Jews. The hatred for Rome that pervades Sib. Or 5 is of interest as background to the Diaspora revolt. As we have seen above, the disturbances in the Diaspora in the first century C.E. appear to have been local conflicts with the Greeks, and the involvement of the Alexandrian Jews in the revolt under Trajan seems to have been initially a defensive reaction to the attack of the Greeks. Yet in Sib. Or 5 hostility toward Rome seems more deeply rooted than the traditional ethnic conflict with the Greeks. The final oracle of the book is especially intriguing in this regard. The allusions to the overthrow of Isis and Sarapis in verses 484-88 provide the clearest echoes of the revolt. Yet, they are followed by the fantasy of a temple to the true god in the land of Egypt. While this is definitely a fantasy, it had a precedent in the temple of Leontopolis. If, as we have suggested, the Egyptian sibyllina originated in the circles of the Oniads and their descendants, the dream of a Jewish temple in Egypt is more understandable. Yet the sibyl anticipates the destruction of this fantasized temple too. The temple of Leontopolis had been closed by the Romans in 73 C.E., and we may suspect here the basis for the sibyl's pessimism on the fate of the future temple. The 160. Strabo 1.2. In Sib. Or. 11:61-79 the Indians/Ethiopians are said to rule over Media.

148


"Ethiopians" take the place of the Romans in the eschatological tableau and may conceivably, because of their association with Gog and Magog, be no more than a symbolic name for Rome. The final batde of the stars vividly expresses the desolation brought about by the failure of the revolt, a desolation which was uUimately the work of Rome. Sibylline Oracle 5 is exceptional in placing the major share of blame on Rome rather than on Egypt. It is difficult to judge how far it was typical of the Jews who joined in the revolt. In any case, it is striking that Sib. Or 5, the only document that can at all be taken to reflect the atutudes behind the revolt, holds out a modified hope for the conversion of Egypt and directs its wrath primarily against Rome. While the earlier sibyls had hoped for deliverance through the agency of a Ptolemy or Cleopatra, Sib. Or. 5 looks for an intervendon of God himself (vs. 174) or, more typically, of a "king sent from God" (vs. 108) or a "man from heaven" (vs. 414).^^^ The reference in verse 108 could apply to a human, earthly king, as was envisaged in Sib. OK 3, but could also be a heavenly figure. Verse 414 clearly refers to a heavenly figure. The other allusions to a savior figure also suggest a heavenly origin. In verse 256, where the issue is confused by the Christian interpolation in verse 257, he is said to come "from the sky."^^^ In verses 158-59 "a great star" comes from heaven and burns the sea and Babylon (i.e., Rome). Stars were frequently associated with savior figures in the Hellenistic world.^^^ Messianic figures in Judaism could be designated as stars by application of the oracle of Balaam. The name given to the leader of the revolt of 132 C.E., Bar Kochba, "son of the star," is significant in this regard. Since stars were frequently identified with angels in the Jewish tradition. Sib. OK 5:158-59 must be seen in the context of such heavenly saviors as the archangel Michael in the book of Daniel and the Qumran War Scroll, Melchizedek in llQMelchizedek, and the "son of man" figure in Daniel and the Similitudes of Enoch. ^^"^ The man from heaven in vs. 414 has traditionally been associated with the "son of man" figure. The parallel with Bar Kochba should warn us, however, against a sharp dichotomy between heavenly and earthly savior figures. Already in the Similitudes of Enoch the heavenly "son of man" figure is identified as the mes-

161. Collins, The Sibylline Oracles, 87-92; Hengel, "Messianische Hoffnung," 674-79. 162. J. C. O'Neill, "The Man from Heaven: Sib Or 5.256-59," JSP 9 (1991) 87-102, argues that there is no Christian interpolation, but that a Jewish oracle spoke of a man sent from heaven who had previously been crucified. It seems easier to suppose a Christian insertion. 163. Collins, The Sibylline Oracles, 90. Stars or comets were said to have marked the births of Alexander, Mithridates, Augustus, Alexander Severus, and, of course, Jesus. 164. Collins, The Scepter and the Star, 173-94. W. Horbury, "The Messianic Associations of 'The Son of Man,'" JTS 36 (1985) 48, sees an allusion to Daniel 7 in Sib. Or 5:414, 432. 165. E.g., S. Mowinckel, He That Cometh (New York: Abingdon, 1954) 357.


149

siah/*^ and 4 Ezra, which was roughly contemporaneous with Sih. Or. 5, speaks of a "man from the sea" who comes on the clouds, as well as of a messiah who is subject to d e a t h . T h e traditional conceptions of an earthly messiah and a heavenly savior appear to have been confused by the late first century c.E.'^^ The savior figure of Sib. Or 5 is then quite compatible with the messianic expectations of the Jewish revolt, although the oracles do not indicate a specific figure like Lukuas. The role of the savior figure in the first two references (5/^. OK 5:108 and 256) is purely destructive. In the other cases, however, he is associated with a restoration of Jerusalem. The restoration of the temple is explicit in verse 422 and is implied in verse 268 by the offering of sacrifices.'™ In both cases, Jerusalem is enlarged by a wall, which in verse 252 extends as far as Joppa and reaches to the clouds (vss. 251, 425).'''' Not only will the restored Judea enjoy peace; it will be freed from "the unclean foot of the Greeks" (vs. 264) and sexual immorality (vs. 430). More clearly than in any previous document of the Egyptian Diaspora, the exaltation of Jerusalem is accompanied by the destruction of other nations. In verses 414-19 the man from heaven "destroyed every city from its foundations with much fire, and burned nations of mortals who were formerly evildoers." Verses 264-85 declare that all the earth will be desolate, unsowed and unploughed, except for the "holy land of the pious," which will flow with milk and honey. This passage allows for an eventual reprieve, if men "pay attention to the immortal eternal God" and desist from idol worship. Both passages, however, would seem to presuppose the end of the Diaspora and abandon the hope for Jewish prosperity under Gentile powers. Judaism is here identified more closely with the ancestral land than in any of the earlier Diaspora documents. Yet this conception is modified in the concluding oracle, which envisages a temple to the true God in the land of Egypt. When this fails there is no restoration of Judea but a cosmic conflict, resulting in a conflagration of the earth and a starless sky. It is possible that the concluding oracle comes from a different hand than the rest of the book and probable that it reflects the desolation after the revolt had failed. In the end, it allows no more hope for the 166. 1 Enoch 48:10. See J. Theisohn, Der Auseiwdhiie Richler (SUNT 12; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1975) 53-99. 167. 4 Ezra 13:1-4; 7:29. See M. E. Stone, 'The Concept of the Messiah in 4 Ezra," in J. Neusner, ed.. Religions in Antiquity (Leiden: Brill, 1968) 295-312. 168. U. B. Mueller, Messias und Menschensohn in jiidischen Apokalypsen und in der Ojf'enbarung des Johannes (Giitersloh: Mohn, 1972) 107-55. 169. So also Hengel, "Messianische Hoffnung," 678. 170. A. Chester, "The Sibyl and the Temple," in W. Horbury, ed., Templum Amicitiae: Essays on the Second Temple Presented to Ernst Bammel (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1991) 47-56. 171. In 424-25 it is a tower which covers many stadia.

150


Diaspora than do the other oracles, but it sees none for Judea either. Sib. Or. 5 is not fully consistent in its expectations. It reflects two attitudes, both of which had probably some currency at the beginning of the second century: the hope for salvaUon in Judea, and the sense that if the Diaspora failed, all failed. It is remarkable that Sib. Or. 5 never entertains the hope for salvation beyond death which was commonplace in the apocalyptic literature of the day. The introduction to Sib. On 5 (vss. 1-51), which consists of a list of emperors, does not share the animation of the rest of the book. While vs. 51 continues the list down to Marcus Aurelius, this verse is probably an addition, since the sibyl does not comment on any emperor after Hadrian, and the favorable remarks on him could scarcely have been written after the Jewish revolt of 132. It would seem, then, that this introduction was written within a decade or so after the Diaspora revolt. Yet it lacks the seething hatred of Rome characteristic of Sib. Or. 5 and is rather in the tradition of Sib. Or. 11, which in part it summarizes. While the sibyl here is scathing in the portrayal of Nero ("a terrible snake"), the odium is not extended to Rome as such. The attitude is that of a Roman provincial. Some emperors may be criticized, but others are praised. So Vespasian is "a destroyer of pious men," but there is no reference to Trajan's suppression of the revolt. Hadrian, who was evidentiy the current emperor, is "a most excellent man." It is somewhat paradoxical that such a benign preface should introduce the vehemently anti-Roman Sib. Or. 5. We should probably understand its role as a modification of the attack on Rome, though not as a complete disavowal. As was the case in Philo and 3 Maccabees, the message is that Rome itself is not the problem, but only certain evil emperors. The Jews after the revolt had learned again the art of accommodation, since for better or worse their destiny lay within the Roman empire.

T h e Later Sibyllines Both the vehement anti-Roman rhetoric of Sib. Or 5 and the more submissive stance of the introduction are echoed in the later sibylline tradition. Sib. Or 8 preserves an extensive Jewish oracle in vss. 1-216, although the remainder of the book is clearly Christian. The Jewish oracle can be dated with some precision to the reign of Marcus Aurelius, about 175 C.E., since the return of Nero is expected in his reign (8:65-74). Its provenance is uncertain, but an extraneous oracle in vss. 131-38 is obviously from Egypt.'^^ In view 172. This passage is in praise of Hadrian, whom it calls the fifteenth king of Egypt.


151

of their general familiarity with the sibylline tradition, the Jewish parts of Sib. Or. 8 are quite probably from Egypt too. The vehemence of their antiRoman invective surpasses even Sib. Or 5. It focuses on social injustices rather than any specific acts against the Jews and may be an accumulation of anti-Roman oracles over a period of time. The last three books of the sibylline collection are essentially lists of emperors in continuity with Sib. Or. 11 and 5:1-51.'^^ The first eleven verses of Sib. Or. 12 correspond exactly to Sib. Or 5:1-11. Books 12-14 are continuous with each other, although the ends and beginnings of the books are punctuated by prayers of the sibyl and introductory formulae. It would appear that the material was constantly updated and that the eschatological conclusion of book 14 was retained as the end of the entire sequence. The locus of the tradition was Alexandria. The latest identifiable event in Sib. Or. 14 is the Arab conquest of Egypt in the seventh century.'^^ Sib. OK 12 is the most significant part of this material. Its interest lies chiefly in its collection of opinions and traditions about emperors down to the mid-third century. Some emperors, Caligula, Nero, Nerva, Commodus, and Septimius Severus, are negatively presented, but the general tone is positive. Augustus, Domitian, Hadrian, and Marcus Aurelius are praised. Vespasian is "noble" and "excellent" despite his suppression of the Jewish revolt. Trajan's suppression of the Diaspora revolt is passed over in a single verse. The passage on Hadrian makes no reference to a revolt, although it is based on a hostile passage in Sib. Or. 8:52-59. In all, Geffcken's opinion that the sibyllist placed his loyalty to Rome above his Judaism seems well founded.

Conclusion Looking back over the four hundred odd years from the early Ptolemaic period to the Diaspora Revolt, we may say that the dominant tendency of Diaspora Jewry was to live as loyal subjects of their Gentile masters and to participate in the culture and society as fully as possible within the constraints of their religious tradition. In the early period, we found some cases, such as Artapanus and the tale of the Tobiads, where the main element of Jewish 173, J. Geffcken, "Romische Kaiser im Volksmunde der Provinz," Nacfirickten der koniglicfien Gesellschaft der Wissenschqften zu Gottingen. Phil.-Hist. Kl. (1901) 188-95 A. Kurfess, "Oracula Sibyllina XI(IX)-XIV(XII), nicht christlich sondem judisch," ZRGG 7 (1955) 270-72. D. S. Potter, Prophecy and History in the Crisis of the Roman Empire (Oxford Oxford University Press, 1990), is a study of Sib. Or 13 as a source for Roman history, 174. W. Scott, "The Last Sibylline Oracle of Alexandria," CQ 9 (1915) 144-66; 207-28 10 (1916) 7-16.

152


identity was ethnic and naUonal pride, but even there loyalty to the Gentile rulers was not in doubt. In the early sibylline oracles there is an apparent hope for the restoration of Jerusalem and the Jewish homeland through the agency of the Ptolemies. In Sib. Or. 5 there is, finally, a sharp rejection of all Gendle power, and here we might legitimately speak of a nationalistic hope centered on the land of Israel. There is little evidence for such hope in Egyptian Judaism before 70 C.E. Even in Sib, Or 5, in its final form, the rejection of the Gentiles is muted in the introduction, and the hope for the land of Israel is abandoned in the final oracle of destruction. The early sibyllines reflect the most energetic attempt of the Jews to participate actively in Egyptian politics. We know that Onias IV and his sons were indeed activists in this way. Their hopes for the glory of Judaism were evidently centered on the Ptolemaic line. Such hopes, however, died with Cleopatra. Even in the second century B.C.E., not all Jews shared this active approach to politics. The Letter of Aristeas carefully avoided political alignment and suggested that Judaism was essentially a religious philosophy. 2 Maccabees, despite its revolutionary subject matter, presented Judaism as devotion to the law and was at pains to suggest that there was no necessary hostility between Gentiles and pious Jews. In the Roman period, Philo evidently regarded Judaism as primarily a religious philosophy. Even 3 Maccabees, which is scarcely a philosophical document, locates Jewish identity in observance of the law rather than in political allegiance. In short, the great bulk of the literature of Egyptian Judaism disregarded political allegiance as a factor in Jewish identity. By presenting Judaism as a religious philosophy or as the piety of Torah observance, the Hellenistic Jews left themselves free to be loyal subjects of the state in which they lived. Despite the persistent concern with matters of political allegiance and civil status, the dominant locus of Jewish identity was in the area of ethics and piety. Even the politically oriented Sibylline Oracles still present a code of behavior which is distinctively Jewish. In Part Two below we will consider several works which pay no attention to political matters but present Judaism as an ethical or religious system in which political identity plays virtually no part.

P A R T

T

W

O

IDENTITY THROUGH ETHICS AND PIETY

CHAPTER 4

The Common Ethic

The distinctiveness of Diaspora Judaism was never simply a matter of political allegiance. It was deeply rooted in customs and observances which ultimately derived from the Mosaic law. The strangeness of Judaism in the eyes of many Gentiles sprang from the influence of Mosaic commandments, especially those which prohibited worship of pagan gods and restricted intercourse with neighboring peoples. Moses and his code drew the admiration of some philosophical Greeks and Romans but were the targets of the most vehement hostile polemic. Jewish apologists like Philo and Josephus could boast of the extent of Moses' fame but were also extended in their efforts to remove the scandal of his laws and reconcile them with Hellenistic culture. In fact, while the Mosaic law always retained an authoritative position in Jewish life in the Diaspora, its role was by no means a simple one. It could be treated selectively, by highlighting some laws and neglecting others, and it could be buttressed with philosophical and religious foundations that were remote from the original Torah. The variety of Diaspora Judaism and its peculiar character can be appreciated in the light of the ways in which it adapted the traditional laws.

J u d a i s m according to Hecataeus The brief account of Judaism by Hecataeus of Abdera is instructive for the Gentile perception of Judaism at the beginning of the Hellenistic period, before the history of ethnic conflict in Alexandria had begun to unfold. A fragment is preserved in Diodorus, Bibliotheca Historica, 40.' Hecataeus follows 1. Diodorus Siculus 40.3, preserved by Photius. See M. Stem, Greek and Latin Authors

155

156


the Egyptian account, of which a variant is found also in Manetho, according to which the Jews were foreigners expelled from Egypt, who setUed in Palestine and founded Jerusalem. In accordance with Hecataeus's general interest in laws and lawgivers, the focus of the narrative is on Moses. While the way of life introduced by Moses is characterized as "unsocial and hostile to foreigners," the account on the whole is favorable. Hecataeus emphasizes the monotheism of the Jews and says that they rejected anthropomorphism: "He did not fabricate any Image of the gods, because he believed that god was not anthropomorphic; rather, the heaven which encompassed the earth was the only god and lord of all." He notes the humanitarian aspects of the laws — the concern for the protection of the poor, and the insistence that children be raised and not exposed. He also notes favorably the prominent role of the priests. Judaism is portrayed as a religion of the law. In fact, traditional Judaism fitted well with Hecataeus's interest in laws and the regulation of society. His generally favorable attitude to Judaism resulted in part from the similarities between Jewish and Egyptian laws, and Hecataeus's preference for the latter over those of the Greeks.^ Hecataeus's interest in laws was exploited by the Jewish forger who composed the Peri loudaion cited by Josephus in his Against Apion: In another passage, Hecataeus mentions our regard for our laws and how we deliberately choose and hold it a point of honor to endure anything rather than transgress them. "And so (he says) neither the slander of their neighbors and of foreign visitors, to which as a nation they are exposed, nor the frequent outrages of Persian kings and satraps can shake their determination; for these laws, naked and defenseless, they face death in its most terrible form rather than repudiate the faith of their forefathers."^ Josephus goes on to paraphrase some examples: the refusal of Jewish workers to collaborate on the restoration of the temple of Bel in Babylon and "again when temples and altars were erected in the country by its invaders, the Jews razed them all to the ground, paying in some cases a fine to the satraps and in others obtaining pardon. For such conduct, he adds, on Jews and Judaism (3 vols.; Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 197484) 1:20-44; J. G. Gager, Moses in Greco-Roman Paganism (SBLMS 16; Nashville: Abingdon, 1972) 26-37; B. Bar-Kochva, Pseudo-Hecataeus 'On the Jews': Legitimizing the Jewish Diaspora {Berkeley: University of California Press. 1996) 18-43. The fragment is attributed to Hecataeus of Miletus, but this is universally taken for a simple mistake by Diodorus. 2. On the general Tendenz of Hecataeus, see P. M. Eraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria (2 vols.; Oxford: Clarendon, 1972) 1:504: "The tendency being what it was — to prove the superiority and greater antiquity of Egyptian culture — it seems very probable that Hecataeus' ultimate aim was to establish the superiority of the kingdom ruled over by Soter." 3.Ag. Ap. 1.190-91.

THE COMMON ETHIC

157

they deserve admiration." It is surely incredible that Hecataeus would admire the Jews for destroying pagan temples, and in any case such acts could not have been perpetrated by Jews before the Hasmonean period. Another passage attributed to Hecataeus by Josephus tells the story of MosoUamus the Jewish archer, who shot a bird that was being observed by an augurer, saying that the bird could not have known the future or it would have avoided the arrow.^ The element of ridicule is not in accordance with the usual attitude of Hecataeus toward religious practices.* Nonetheless, many enlightened Greeks were critical both of temples and of divination, and many modern scholars have been willing to believe in at least the partial authenticity of these fragments.^

The Basis for a C o m m o n Ethic The authentic fragments of Hecataeus illustrate the point that while Gentiles found Judaism alien and uninviting in some respects, enlightened Greeks could also find much in Judaism to admire. Several early Hellenistic writers (Megasthenes, Theophrastus, Clearchus of Soli) speak of the Jews as philosophers.^ Moses was widely respected as a wise lawgiver.^ Some of the features of Judaism that contrasted most sharply with Greek religion, such as monotheism and rejection of idols, were considered admirable by enlightened Greeks. "What man then," asks Strabo, "if he has sense, could be bold enough to fabricate an image of God resembling any creature amongst us? Nay, people should leave off all image-carving, and setting apart a sacred precinct and a worthy sanctuary, should worship God without an image." Those persuaded by Moses were "thoughtful men."''' Conversely, Jews could present their religion in a way that invited the respect of such Greeks, and that expressed their own Hellenistic identity, without repudiating their own fundamental beliefs and values. The attempt to discriminate between those aspects of Hellenistic culture that were acceptable to Judaism and those that were not is essential to the self-understanding of Diaspora Judaism. 4. Bar-Kochva, Pseudo-Hecataeus. 97. 5. Ag.Ap. 1.201-4. 6. Bar-Kochva, Pseudo-Hecataeus, 61. 7. See Stern, Greek and Latin Authors, 1:20-25. Stern concludes that Josephus had before him a Jewish revision of an authentic writing by Hecataeus. 8. Stern, Greek and Latin Authors, 1:8-17 (Theophrastus); 45-46 (Megasthenes); 47-52 (Clearchus); L. H. Feldman, Jew and Gentile in the Ancient World (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993) 203-4. 9. Gager, Moses in Greco-Roman Paganism, 25-79. See especially Strabo 16.2.35-39. 10. Strabo 16.2.35-36; Stem, Greek and Latin Authors, 300.

158

IDENTITY THROUGH ETHICS A N D PIETY

The earUest literature of the Hellenistic Diaspora, which can be dated prior to the reign of Philometor, displays widely divergent attitudes towards the law. On the one hand, Demetrius the Chronographer shows a rather scrupulous attitude both in his concern for reconciling chronological data and in his demonstration that Moses (îd not marry outside his people. At the other extreme, Artapanus shows no compunction in associating Moses with the Egyptian animal cults. We shall see later yet another distinct viewpoint in the Exagoge of Ezekiel the Tragedian. The fragmentary character of these early writings makes it difficult to get a clear picture of their attitudes to the law. It is apparent, however, that those early writings which have in part survived were not primarily oriented to the law and did not share any common underlying attitude towards it. From the time of Philometor on, the Jewish documents have been more substantially preserved, but they also begin to reflect an emerging common ethic. The characteristic feature of this ethic was that it emphasized those aspects of Jewish law which were respected by enlightened Gentiles and fitted easily into the self-understanding of the Jewish authors as enlightened Hellenes — chiefly monotheism and the prohibition of idolatry, and various sexual laws such as the prohibition of homosexuality.^^ These matters had an important place in Jewish tradition, but they could be formulated in ways that were also thoroughly Hellenistic. There had been a growing tendency towards monotheism in Greek philosophy since the fifth century B.C.E.^^ Antisthenes, a pupil of Socrates and teacher of Diogenes, had declared that there are many gods by convention, but only one god in nature.'^ The tendency was furthered by the natural theology of the Stoics and is vividly illustrated in Cleanthes' Hymn to Zeus. Critiques of idolatry were not uncommon in the philosophers, and they were often extended to the use of temples as well.^* The philosophical critique of idolatry is found as early as Heraclitus and Xenophanes,'^ and again in Zeno, 11. Compare K. Berger, Die Gesetzauslegung Jesu (WMANT 40; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1972) 39: "Fiir eine bestimmte Schicht des jiidischen Hellenismus ist nomos de facto nicht das atl. Gesetz, sondem lediglich ein Monotheismus, verbunden mit allgemeinen und sozialen Tugenden." 12. See M. Nilsson. Geschichte der Gnechischen Religion (Munich: Beck, 1950) 2:54652. See also the usage of the epithet monos: G. Delling, "Monos Theos," in idem, Studien zum Neuen Testament und zum hellenistischen Judenlum (Gbttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1970) 391-400. 13. Cicero, De Natura Deorum 1.32. 14. H. W, Attridge, First-Century Cynicism in the Epistles of Heraclitus (HTS 29; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1976) 13-23, and the material there cited. See also Attridge, "The Philosophical Critique of Religion under the Early Bmpke" ANRW ll.\6. \ (1978) 45-77. 15. H. Diels and W. Kranz, Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker (10th ed.; Berlin: Weidmann, 1960-61) frag. 5. See also B. de Borries, Quid veteres philosophi de idolatria senserint (Gottingen: Dieterich, 1918) 72.

THE COMMON ETHIC

159

the founder of Stoicism.'* According to St. Augustine, the Roman antiquarian Varro claimed that the Romans had worshipped the gods without an image for more than a hundred and seventy years. '"If this usage had continued to our own day,' he says, 'our worship of the gods would be more devout.' And in support of his opinion he adduces, among other things, the testimony of the Jewish race."''' Numerous other critiques of idolatry can be found in the Stoic and Cynic philosophers of the Hellenistic and early Roman periods. Jewish sexual ethics could also find support in the Hellenistic world. Greek attitudes towards adultery varied and, in general, were harsher on women than on men. There are numerous tales of individual vengeance and public punishments.'^ Plutarch (Lycurgus 15) recounts a story in which adultery is said to have been unknown among the ancient Spartans. Plato, in the Laws (8.841-42), proposed "one or other of two standards of sexual conduct." Ideally, no one would dare to have relations with any woman or man other than his spouse. Alternatively, if a man had an affair with another woman, he must keep it secret. If detected he would lose his citizen's rights. Later, Epictetus (Discourses 2.22.28) even claimed that whatever produced incontinents, adulterers, and seducers was not really human. Jewish strictness on the question of adultery, then, was not alien to Hellenistic thought on the subject, although it was atypical. No sin is denounced more frequently in Jewish writings than homosexuality. Despite the generally indulgent Greek tradition on this subject, there was also a long history of criticism. Plato conveys a positive attitude in the Symposium, but in the Laws (636) he condemns homosexuality unequivocally as contrary to nature. He adds, however, that "if anyone following nature should lay down the law . . . and denounce these lusts as contrary to nature, adducing the animals as a proof that such unions were monstrous, he might prove his point, but he would be wholly at variance with the custom of your states" (Laws 836). Antisthenes and the Cynics likewise rejected it, as did the Epicureans.'^ Here again the Jewish writers were not simply at variance with Greek morality but could be seen as taking sides in widespread Greek debate. The Jewish law that children be reared, not aborted or exposed, had already been noted with approval by Hecataeus. Greek and Roman moralists 16. In his Republic, Zeno prohibited the building of temples and, according to Clement, the erection of idols. Diogenes Laertius 7.33; Clement, Stromateis, 5.11.76, 1-3. 17. Augustine, De Civitate Dei 4.31. 18. For random anecdotes and references, see H. Licht, Sexual Life in Ancient Greece (London: The Abbey Library, 1932) 61-63. 19. W. KroU, "Knabenliebe," PWRE 11.1:897-906. For a full treatment of the subject, see K. J. Dover, Greek Homosexuality (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1978). See also his Greek Popular Morality in the Time of Plato and Aristotle (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1974) 213-16.

160


seldom concern themselves with this issue, but the Roman satirist Juvenal refers scathingly to the widespread practice of a b o r t i o n . I n all these points, the sexual morality defended by the Jewish writers was indeed faithful to Jewish law, but it could also expect to find some sympathy among enlightened Gentiles and could be defended within the context of Hellenistic debates. By emphasizing those aspects of Jewish law which could command respect in a Gentile context, the Hellenistic Jewish writers were able to project Judaism as a universal religion which was in accordance with the laws of nature.^' Distinctive aspects of Judaism such as circumcision and dietary laws were usually played down, with a few notable exceptions. We need not conclude that the Jews of Egypt actually abandoned these practices — even such a Hellenized Jew as Philo was faithful to the letter of the law — but these elements were not up front or central in their formulations of Jewish ethics. Naturally there were variations in emphasis from text to text. In the rest of this chapter we will consider three samples from the less philosophical literature of Hellenistic Judaism, the Sibylline Oracles, the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, and the sayings of Pseudo-Phocylides.

T h e Sibylline

Oracles

The Third Sibyl We have already seen that the Third Sibyl is largely concerned with predictions of the destruction of various Gentile peoples and the glorious restoration of Israel. The ethical and religious requirements of the sibyl are found in the hortatory passages, framed by the eschatological predictions. These passages specify the kinds of conduct that lead to destruction and those that lead to salvation and deliverance, and so identify the conduct required by true religion. Thus, the destruction of the Romans will be brought about through their "unjust haughtiness," homosexuality, and greed (3:182-90). The Greeks are condemned for idolatry (3:545-55), and several nations are denounced for homosexuality and idolatry and, in general, for "transgressing the holy law of immortal God, which they transgressed" (3:599-600). The conduct required by the sibyl is summarized in verses 762-66: "But urge on your minds in your breasts and shun unlawful worship. Worship the Living One. Avoid

20. Juvenal, Satires 6.594-97. See Attridge, First-Century Cynicism, 28. 21. D. Georgi, The Opponents of Paul in Second Corinthians (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986) 148-51.

THE COMMON ETHIC

161

adultery and indiscriminate intercourse with males. Rear your own offspring and do not kill it, for the Immortal is angry at whoever commits these sins." Because of these persistent denunciations of Gentile sin, John Barclay has claimed that the book is dominated by a mood of social alienation and cultural a n t a g o n i s m . B u t the denunciations are only part of the story. The sibyl also appeals repeatedly to the Greeks to turn to the worship of the one God and support his temple. They can escape war and slavery by sending their holocausts to the temple of the great God (3:545-72). Again in verses 624-34 people are asked to show their conversion by sacrificing bulls and lambs. Finally, the sibyl predicts that after great eschatological upheavals all cities and islands will turn to the great God, send offerings to the temple, and ponder the law of the Most High God (3:710-31). These appeals for conversion do not bespeak alienation or antagonism. Barclay objects that this conversion can only come about when the Gentiles abandon idolatry and recognize the unique sanctity of the Jerusalem temple. Indeed. That is how conversion is defined. Even Philo, whom Barclay rightly regards as a model of cultural convergence, says that in an ideal world "each nation would abandon its peculiar ways, and throwing overboard its ancestral customs, turn to honoring our laws alone."2^* The universalism implied is triumphalist and condescending, but It is as generous as believers in an exclusive, revealed religion can ever be.^^ It is far from the hostility to the Gentile world that we find later in Sib. Or. 5. In the words of Erich Gruen: "Insofar as the Third Book contains negative aspersions upon Greeks, it includes them among wayward peoples whose failure to see the truth has led them into arrogance, impiety, and immorality, thus provoking divine vengeance. But Greeks alone are singled out for encouragement to enter the fold of the true believers."'^* The repeated references to the reign of the seventh king of Egypt as the turning point of history, and the more explicit role of "the king from the sun," show that the sibyl expected that a favorable Ptolemaic ruler would play a role in bringing about the great conversion. 22. J. M. G. Barclay, Jews in tfie Mediterranean Diaspora from Alexander to Trajan (323 BCE-tl7 CE) (Edinburgh: Clark, 1996) 218-25. 23. Ibid., 222. He recognizes the vision of repentance only in "the final oracle." 24. De Vita Mosis 2.44. See A. Mendelson, Pliilo's Jewish Identity (BJS 161; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1988) 128-32. 25. E. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism: The Reinvention of Jewish Tradition (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998) 288, calls the gesture of the sibyl "noble and inagnanimous." Cf. also M. Simon, "Sur quelques aspects des Oracles Sibyllins juifs," in D. Hellholm, ed.. Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East (Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1983) 219-33: "Un souffle universaliste anime ces Merits" (p. 232). 26. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism. 287. Gruen's portrayal of the Third Sibyl as vehemently anti-Roman is not supported by the texts that make up the original stratum of the book. (Gruen does not accept the distinction of strata.)

] 62


Over against the denunciations of Gentile sin stand the eulogies of the Jews — "a race of most righteous men" who avoid all forms of divination and "the astrological predictions of the Chaldeans,"^^ and are characterized by "righteousness and virtue and not love of money," helping the poor and sharing with them, "fulfilling the word of the great God, the hymn of the law,^^ for the Heavenly One gave the earth in common to all" (3:218-47). The future ideal is the restoraUon of "a sacred race of pious men who attend to the counsels and intention of the Most High" and "fully honor the temple of the great God" with all kinds of sacrifices. These, "sharing in the righteousness of the law of the Most High," will be "exalted as prophets by the Immortal and bring great joy to all mortals. For to them alone did the great God give wise counsel and faith and excellent understanding in their hearts. Hence they honor God, their parents, and holy wedlock and avoid homosexuality" (3:573-600). In the final Utopian state, "the sons of the great God will all live peacefully around the temple." The nadons will be moved with admiration and resolve: "Let us send to the temple, since He alone is sovereign, and let us all ponder the law of the Most High God" and avoid idolatry (3:702-31). In all of this, the Jewish law has a clear and pivotal place. The sibyl refers explicitly to the law given to Moses on Mt. Sinai (3:255-58). True, worship is specifically located at the temple of Jerusalem, and only the Jews, in contrast with "Phoenicians, Egyptians and Romans, spacious Greece and many nations of others," observe the law (3:597-98). Jews do, indeed, fail on occasion and can be punished like anyone else if they do not "obey in your heart the holy law of the immortal God" but "worship unseemly idols" (3:275-79). This is illustrated by the Babylonian exile. However, the exile also illustrates that they are restored "as immortal God decreed for you." What they must do is "remain trusting in the holy laws of the great God" (3:283-84). Yet it is not only to the Jews that the law applies. The other nations, too, can be condemned for faihng to keep the law (3:599-600). The sibyl, like Romans 1 and Wisdom of Solomon 13, seems to presume that the essential law is known to everyone by nature. In fact, the requirements of the sibyl could be seen to a great extent in terms of natural law.^' The basic sin is idolatry.'" Accordingly, the main requirement for the conversion of the Greeks is that they "revere the name of the one who has begotten all" (3:550) and bring their sacrifices to the temple of the one true God (3:545-72). De-

27. The contrast with Pseudo-Eupolemus at this point has often been noted, but there is no adequate reason to suppose deliberate polemic. 28. Ennomon hymnon. The adjective is a play on nomos as "harmony" and as "law." 29. Cf. Berger, Die Gesetzauslegung, 41. 30. V. Nikiprowetzky, La Troisieme Sibylle (Eludes Juives 9; Paris: Mouton, 1970) 8283.

THE COMMON ETHIC

163

Spite the implication of the superiority of Judaism, this demand is not completely alien to Greek sensibilities. The accusation of idolatry is based on a euhemeristic account of the origin of Greek religion, which was quite intelligible in a Greek context:^' "it is a thousand years and five hundred more since the overbearing kings of the Greeks reigned, who began the first evils for mortals setting up many idols of dead gods" (3:551-54). These condemnations of idolatry were standard fare in Hellenistic Judaism, developed not least by Philo.^^ The sibyl echoes the common Jewish position on sexual abuses. Her warnings against the dangers of arrogance and greed are also commonplace. The assertion that God gave the earth in common to all (3:247, 261) rings of Stoicism.^^ The same sentiment is reflected in Pseudo-Phocylides (30): "Let all of life be in common." The sibyl takes a more distinctive position in her unequivocal condemnation of augury, divination, and "the astrological predictions of the Chaldeans" (3:220-28).^^ Divination had philosophical respectability in the Hellenistic age, since it was defended by most Stoics. However, there were notable dissenters, such as Cameades, founder of the Third, or New, Academy (second century B.C.E.) and the Epicureans, while the Stoic Panaetius had his doubts. Astrology was pervasive In the Hellenistic world, and one of the great astrological works, that of Nechepso and Petosiris, was composed in Egypt and roughly contemporary with the Third S i b y l . M a n y Jewish writings from the period display a positive attitude on this subject, in sharp contrast to the sibyl.^* In addition to Pseudo-Eupolemus, who credited Abraham with inventing astrology, we should note the Treatise of Shem, a fullfledged Jewish astrological work apparently composed in Egypt at some 31. Euhemerism was the theory put forward by Euhemerus of Messene (ca. 300 B . C . E . ) that the gods of popular worship had been kings and conquerors to whom humankind had shown gratitude by worshipping them as gods (Diodorus Siculus 6.1; 5.41). On the theory and its predecessors, see Nilsson, Gescfiichfe, 2:269-74. Sib. Or. 3 gives a euhemeristic account of early history in 3:110-55. Kronos and the Titans in that passage are presumably the "overbearing kings" referred to here. 32. De Decalogo 52-81; De Vita Conlemplaliva 3-9; De Specialibiis Legibus 1.13-29; 2.255. See J. Tromp, "The Critique of Idolatry in the Context of Jewish Monotheism," in P. W. van der Horst, ed.. Aspects of Religious Contact and Conflict in the Ancient World (Utrecht: University of Utrecht, 1995) 105-20. 33. Nikiprowetzky, La Troisieme Sibylle, 81. Cf. Zeno in Plutarch, De Alexandri Virtute 1.6 (text in H. F. A. von Arnim, ed., Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta [4 vols.; Leipzig: Teubner, 1903-24] 1:264). 34. See P. van der Horst, "Jewish Self-Definition by Way of Contrast in Oracula Sibyllina III 218-247," in idem, ed.. Aspects of Religious Contact, 147-66. 35. See Nilsson, Geschichte, 261-67. For Nechepso and Petosiris, see E. Riess, "Nechepsonis et Petosiridis Fragmenta Magica," Philologus Supplementband 6 (1892-93) 32788. 36. J. H. Charlesworth, "Jewish Interest in Astrology during the Hellenistic and Roman Period," ANRW II.20.2 (1987) 926-50.

164


time in the Roman p e r i o d . Y e t even here the sibyl's stand could be appreciated by some Greeks and Romans. Cicero could cite with approval the statement of Eudoxus, a pupil of Plato, that "no reliance whatever is to be placed in Chaldean astrologers," and he also listed false prophecies made to Pompey, Crassus, and Caesar.'^ Low-level astrology and Chaldaei were often assailed by Roman magistrates and satirists, and in 139 B.C.E. the Chaldaei were expelled from Rome.^^ The sibyl was focusing attention on an issue of deep interest to the Hellenistic world, where debate was possible on the basis of one's understanding of nature.'*'* So, while the sibyl remains devoted to the law of Moses, she treats it in practice as natural law. There is no reference to the more peculiar dietary laws of Leviticus, or to the laws which separated Jew from Gentile. There is no indication that circumcision was required of converts.*^ At the end, God "will put in effect a common law for men throughout the whole earth" (75758). It is evident that this law is not only concerned with Jewish traditions but with the fulfillment of human nature. Yet, for all the universalism implied in the reduction of the law to ethical principles of broad human interest, the sibyl remains stubbornly particularistic. Unlike, for example, Pseudo-Aristeas, she does not say that those who worship Zeus are worshipping the same God; unlike PseudoPhocylides, she is unequivocal in her rejection of polytheism. Most significantly, she insists on the primacy of the Jerusalem t e m p l e . T h i s advocacy

37. See J . H. Chadesworth, "Jewish Astrology in the Talmud, Pseudepigrapha, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and Early Palestinian Synagogues," HTR 70 (1977) 183-200; idem, "Rylands Syriac Ms. 44 and A New Addition to the Pseudepigrapha: The Treatise of Shem Discussed and Translated," BJRL 60 (1978) 376-403. Chadesworth suggests a date in the last third of the first century B . C . E . , but the evidence is not clear and the document could be much later. 38. Cicero, De Divinatione 87-99. 39. E. J. Bickerman, "The Altars of the Gentiles," in idem, Sliidies in Jewish and Christian History (3 vols.; AGJU 9; Leiden: Brill, 1976-86) 2:329; A. Baumstark, "Chaldaei," ^^^^£3 (1899) 2059-60. 40. The Sibyl was not, of course, the only Jewish voice raised against astrology. See also Jubilees 12:17; Philo, De Abrahamo, M; De Migratione Abrahami, 187-88. Astrology is part of the corrupting revelation of the Watchers in 1 Enoch 8. 41. J . J. Collins, "A Symbol of Otherness: Circumcision and Salvation in the First Century," in idem. Seers, Sibyls and Sages in Hellenistic-Roman Judaism (Leiden: Brill, 1997) 212-14 (originally published in J . Neusner and E. S. Frerichs, eds., "To See Ourselves as Others See Us": Christians, Jews, "Others" in Late Antiquity (Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1985) 163-86. 42. In this regard, it is noteworthy that Sib. Or. 3, unlike Pseudo-Phocylides, does not attach a spiritual significance to ablutions. The precise meaning of verses 591-93 ("at dawn they lift up holy arms towards heaven, from their beds, always sanctifying the flesh [or "hands"] with water") is unclear. (See Nikiprowetzky, La Troisi&me Sibylle, 238-40.) These practices are said to be typical of Jews but are not required of Gentiles. In any case, neither prayer nor ablutions could be unfamiliar to a Hellenistic audience. See E. Pfister, "Katharsis," PWRE Supp 6 (1935) 146-62.

THE COMMON ETHIC

165

of the temple, as we have seen In Chapter 2 above, is part of the particular political stance of the work and reflects its provenance. It shows that the propaganda of the sibyl was in the service of concrete political and geographical ideals, not of a philosophy or mystical cult, as may have been the case in some other Jewish documents. The tension between the universalistic understanding of the law and the particularistic attachment to land and temple is quite typical of Diaspora Judaism in the Hellenistic period,''^ although the sibyl is exceptional in the prominence she gives to the sacrificial cult.

Sibylline Oracle 5 The ethical aspects of the sibylline tradition persist in Sib. Or. 5, at the beginning of the second century C.E., despite the vastly different political climate of this book. Idolatry is repeatedly denounced (5:75-85; 278-80; 353-56; 403-5; 495-96) but with a new vehemence against Egyptian theriolatry: "They worship stones and brute beasts instead of God, revering very many things, one here, another there, which have no reason or mind or hearing, and things which it is not even lawful for me to mention" (5:75-79). Sexual offenses and homosexuality are again prominent, especially homosexuahty. "Adulteries, illicit love of boys" are ranked with murder and din of battle as terrible things which will cease in the eschatological age (5:430). The Romans are "matricides . . . who formerly impiously catered for pederasty and set up in houses prostitutes who were pure before" and are also accused of incest and bestiality (5:386-97; cf. 5:166).*^ Most striking in Sib. Or 5 is the emphasis on the temple and cultic piety.^^ The sibyl bewails the destruction of the temple (5:150, 398-410) but also recalls how the Jews honored the great God with holy sacrifices and hecatombs (5:406-7). In the final section, a temple in Egypt is envisaged where sacrifices will be offered, though this too will be destroyed (5:500-507). Even after the temple was no more, this particular strand of the sibylline tradition remained bound to its concrete symbolism. Jewish identity in the sibyllines is derived mainly from this symbolism and from the political attitudes implied. The ethics are not distinctive in the context of Hellenistic Judaism.

43. J. J. Collins, "Natural Theology and Biblical Tradition: The Case of Hellenistic Judaism," CBQ 60 (1998) 1-15. 44. The charge of matricide refers to Nero, a central figure in Sib. Or. 5. See J. J, Collins, Tlie Sibylline Oracles of Egyptian Judaism (SBLDS 13; Missoula: Scholars, 1974) 80-87. 45. See also A. Chester, "The Sibyl and the Temple," in W. Horbury, ed„ Templum Amicitiae: Essays on the Second Temple Presented to Ernst Bammel (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1991) 47-56, 59-62; Simon, "Sur Quelques Aspects," 228.

166


Sibylline Oracle 4 A different strand of the sibylline tradition is found in Sih. Or. 4, which, in its present form, was written towards the end of the first century C.E. The date is established by references to the destruction of the Jerusalem temple (4:116), the legend of Nero's flight to the Parthians and future return (4:119-24; 4:138-39), and the erupdon of Vesuvius in 79 C.E. (4:130-35).'*6 There is no clear indication of the place of origin, but the differences over against Sib. Or. 3 and 5 tell against an Egypdan provenance.*'' In view of the emphasis on baptism, a location in the Jordan valley has been proposed.*^ The ethics of Sib. On 4 repeat the standard themes of the Diaspora literature. Monotheism and God's power as creator are emphasized. There is polemic against idolatry (5:6-7), adultery and homosexuaUty (5:33-34), as well as injustice and violence. But Sib. On 4 is distinguished from other Hellenistic Jewish writings in its outright rejection of temple worship: "For He has not, as house, stone set up as a temple, dumb and toothless, a bane which brings many woes to men, but one which it is not possible to see from earth nor to measure with mortal eyes, since it was not fashioned by mortal hand" (4:8-11). The righteous reject all temples, altars, and sacrifices (4:27-30). If the author intended an exception for the Jerusalem temple, he did not make it explicit.*^ He mentions that a storm from Italy "will sack the great temple of God" (4:116). One of the marks of the occasion will be that the Romans will "commit repulsive murders in front of the temple" (4:118), suggesting that the temple will be defiled.^"* Disapproval of the Roman destruction, however, does not in itself imply a positive attitude towards the temple. Sib. Or 4 is evidently at variance with Sib. Or. 3 and 5 on this point. Even more striking is the attitude to conversion in Sib. Or 4. In verse 162, after describing the impiety of the last times, the sibyl appeals: "Ah, wretched mortals, change these things and do not lead the great God to all sorts of anger, but abandon daggers and groanings, murders and outrages, 46. S. A. Redmond, "The Date of the Fourth Sibylline Oracle," The Second Century 7 (1989-90) 129-49, argues for a redaction in the late second century C . E . , on the basis of supposed allusions in verses 140-51. But these verses, which come after the return of Nero in verse 138, surely refer to the eschatological future and are not ex eventu. 47. See J. J. Collins, "The Place of the Fourth Sibyl in the Development of the Jewish Sibyllina," JJS 25 (1974) 365-80, contra V. Nikiprowetzky, "Reflexions sur Quelques Problemes du Quatrieme et du Cinquifeme Livre des Oracles Sibyllins," HUCA 43 (1972) 2976. 48. J. Thomas, Le Mouvement Baptiste en Palestine et Syrie (Gembloux: Duculot, 1938) 223. 49. Simon, "Sur quelques aspects," 229, contra Nikiprowetzky, La Troisieme Sibylle, 233-35. 50. Nikiprowetzky, "Reflexions," 68, argues plausibly that the "they" in question are the Romans, not the Zealots.

THE COMMON ETHIC

167

and wash your whole bodies in perennial rivers. Stretch out your hands to heaven and ask forgiveness for your previous deeds and make propitiation for bitter impiety with words of praise. God will grant repentance and will not destroy." This passage has been regarded as a reference to proselyte baptism. This is scarcely accurate. The appeal is addressed to humanity at large, and there is nothing to suggest that anyone Is expected to convert to Judaism. Baptism is here a symbolic gesture of repentance, as it was with John the Baptist, not a rite of initiation.^' It is noteworthy, however, that this is the only ritual action demanded. There is no question of circumcision or of any distinctively Jewish observance. The oracle shows the pervasiveness of the basic polemic against idolatry and sexual sins, but it adds its own distinctive nuances.

The Sibylline Fragments One other strand of the sibylline tradition must be noted briefly. Sib. Or. 3:145 and the fragments preserved by Theophilus and Lactantius attest a highly spiritual idea of God which goes far beyond anything else in the sibylline tradition and has its closest parallels in the Orphic fragments and in Philo. God is one, in the sense of both unity and uniqueness (3:11; F 1:7, 32; F 3:3; F 5:1). He is eternal (3:15), self-begotten, and invisible (3:11). Great emphasis is laid on the contrast between perishable and imperishable (Fragments 1-3). Idolatry is the supreme sin because it is not in accordance with truth. Yet the highly spiritual fragments do not reject sacrificial cult as such, but only insist that it be offered to the true God (F 1:20-22). These passages evidently appealed to a more rarified audience than did the main corpus of the Sibyllina. Despite the characteristic Jewish polemic against idolatry, the Judaism of these fragments is indistinguishable from philosophical Hellenistic religion. Circumcision, Sabbath observance, or such distinctive Jewish practices are not demanded by the sibyl in these passages. There is no clear distinction between the ethics of Judaism and those of a God-fearer, or even of a philosophically minded pagan.

51. See Collins, "The Place of the Fourth Sibyl," 378-80. The biblical point of departure was Isa. 1:16. The closest parallels to Sib. Or. 4 can be found in the Ebionite and Elcasaite Christian sects, which also rejected both temple worship and bloody sacrifices.

168


Pseudo-Phocylides A very different strand of Hellenistic Judaism is represented by the sayings of Pseudo-Phocylides.^^ Like the authors of the Sibylline Oracles, the author of these sayings availed of a Gentile pseudonym: Phocylides was a Greek gnomic poet who lived in Miletus in Ionia in the mid-sixth century B.C.E. Unlike the sibyl, however, Pseudo-Phocylides made no overt reference to Judaism. Consequently, the poem was accepted as an authentic work of Phocylides through the Middle Ages, until its authenticity was challenged by Joseph Scaliger in 1606.^^ Its Jewish origin is betrayed only by the use of the Septuagint and by its adherence to characteristic Jewish themes. Even so, its provenance is not beyond question.^* As is typical of gnomic and of proverbial poetry, the content gives little indication of date. Pseudo-PhocyJides knew the Septuagint and uses a number of word forms which were unknown before the Hellenistic age, some of which appear only in the first century C.E. Parallels with such Stoic writers as Seneca and Musonius Rufus also point to the first century C.E. P. W. van der Horst, the best recent authority on Pseudo-Phocylides, tentatively suggested a date between 30 B.C.E. and 40 C.E., on the assumption that "an Alexandrian Jew could not have maintained such great openness towards pagan culture" after the pogroms of the time of Caligula.^^ It is by no means certain that this assumption is justified. The very difficulty of specifying the time of origin is due in part to the consistency of the ethical tradition and the lack of peculiar, distinguishing traits in Pseudo-Phocylides. Clear indications of the place of composition are likewise elusive. Most scholars opt for Alexandria. Verse 102, "it is not good to dissolve the human frame," probably refers to the dissection of corpses for the study of anatomy, a practice known only from Alexandria in the ancient 52. See P W. van der Horst, The Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides (Leiden: Brill, 1978); N. Walter, Poetische Schriften (JSHRZ 4.3; Gutersloh; Mohn, 1983) 197-216; P. Deiron, Pseudo-Phocylide: Sentences (Paris: Societe d'Edition "Les Belles Lettres," 1986); J. Thoinas, Der Judische Phokylides (GoUingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1992); W. T. Wilson, The Mysteries of Righteousness: The Literary Composition and Genre of the Sentences of PseudoPhocylides (Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1994); J. J. Collins, Jewish Wisdom in the Hellenistic Age (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1997) 158-77. 53. See the excellent history of scholarship by van der Horst, The Sentences of PseudoPhocylides. 3-54. 54. M. Goodman, in E. Schurer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 B-C.~A.D. 135) (rev. and ed. G. Vermes, F. Millar, and M. Goodman; 3 vols.; Edinburgh: Clark, 1973-87) 3.1:688, favors Jev/ish authorship but grants that it is not entirely clear whether the author is Jewish. 55. Van der Horst, The Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides, 81-83. He subsequently extended the range of the possible date to include the whole first century B . C . E . ("PseudoPhocylides Revisited," in idem. Essays on the Jewish World of Early Christianity [Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1990] 35-62).

THE COMMON ETHIC

169

w o r l d . V e r s e 39 states that "strangers should be held in equal honor with citizens."^'' The sentiment fits well enough with the general humanitarian attitudes of Pseudo-Phocylides, but It takes on a special significance in the light of the Jewish stiuggle for recognition in Alexandria in the first century C.E. Philo argued that "strangers, in my judgment, must be regarded as suppliants of those who receive them, and not only suppliants but settlers and friends who are anxious to obtain equal rights with the burgesses, and are near to being citizens because they differ little from the original inhabitants."^^ If Pseudo-Phocylides 39 is indeed to be read in this context, it provides a rare confirmation of the date and setting of the work. While these considerations may not amount to proof that the text originated in Alexandria, there is nothing at all to support any other provenance.^^ The Jewish origin of the work is betrayed only by a few sayings which clearly echo the Septuagint (e.g., v. 140: "If a beast of your enemy falls on the way, help it to rise" — cf. Exod. 23:5). There are strong biblical overtones in verses 9-21, which are exhortations to justice.^"* Yet the distinctive laws of Judaism, such as circumcision and Sabbath observance, are ignored. The admonition in verse 31 ("Do not eat blood; abstain from food sacrificed to idols") is an interpolation which is found in only one inferior manuscript).^' There is only one element that is described by van der Horst as "typically Jewish and very un-Greek."^^ This is the formulation of the afterlife in verses 103-4: "we hope that the remains of the departed will soon come to the light again out of the earth." This apparently physical notion of resurrection is juxtaposed with the assertion that the resurrected ones "will become gods" (v. 104). Verses 107-8 imply that the body dissolves after death while the spirit is released, and verse 115 states very explicitiy that the soul is immortal. These variant formulations reflect the typical range of Jewish beliefs about the afterlife both in Judea and in the Diaspora. They cannot be neatly resolved into a coherent system. Needless to say, ideas of afterlife were widespread in the Hellenistic world. The particular suggestion of physi56. R Kudlien, "Anatomle," PWRESup 11 (1968) 38-48; van der Horst, PseudoPhocylides, 183-84. 57. Van der Horst, The Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides. 139. The word for "strangers" is epelydes. 58. De Vita Mosis 1.35. The term for "strangers" is xenoi. 59. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 336, lists Pseudo-Phocylides as representative of Judaism outside Egypt, on the grounds that Egyptian provenance is not certain. 60. Thomas, Der jUdische Phokylides, 161-70, following Bernays, argues that this section is based on Leviticus 19 in conjunction with the Decalogue. There are several parallels to Leviticus 19 in this section, but also to other sources, both Greek and Jewish. See K.-W. Niebuhr, Gesetz und Pardnese: Katechismusartige Weisungsreihen in der friihjUdischen Literatur (Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1987) 20-26. 61. Van der Horst, The Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides, 135. 62. Ibid., 185.

170


cal resurrection may be taken as a trace of the author's Judaism, but it is sufficiently counterbalanced with well-worn Greek formulations that the ideas could seem neither strange nor offensive to a Hellenistic audience.^' The sayings share considerable common material with Philo's Hypothetica 7.1-9 and Josephus's Against Apion 2.190-219.^'* Philo and Josephus claim to be giving a summary of the Jewish laws, but they are highly selective and they also include material which goes beyond the actual Torah but is derived from Greek sources or designed for a Hellenistic audience.^^ The poem of Pseudo-Phocylides is, of course, disguised as the work of a Gentile, with no overt reference to the Jewish law at all. In addition to monotheism, all three place heavy emphasis on sexual matters — adultery {Hyp. 7.1; Ag. Ap. 2.199; Ps.-Phoc. 3, 177-78); homosexuality {Hyp. 7.1; Ag. Ap. 2.199, 215; Ps.-Phoc. 3, 190-91); rape of a virgin {Hyp. 7.1; Ag. Ap. 2.215; Ps.Phoc. 198); abortion {Hyp. Ag. Ap. I.IQI; Ps.-Phoc. 183). Josephus {Ag. Ap. 2.202) and Pseudo-Phocylides (v. 185) forbid sexual relations with a pregnant woman. Philo {Hyp. 1.1) and Pseudo-Phocylides (v. 186) forbid emasculation. The common material also extends to such duties as those of parents and children, husband and wife, the young and their elders, and the burial of the dead.^^ Some of the offenses (e.g., abortion, abandoning children) are not explicitiy noted in the Hebrew Bible. Philo and Josephus show influence from a group of laws which were known in antiquity as unwritten laws attributed to Buzyges, the legendary hero of an Attic priestly tribe.^^ The affinities of these codes with the Noachian laws have often been noted.^^ While the Noachian laws were fully developed in Rabbinic literature, the underlying 63. See further F. Christ, "Des Leben nach dem Tode bei Pseudo-Phokylides," rz 31 (1975) 140-49; U. Fischer, Eschatologie und Jenseitserwartung im Hellenistischen Diasporajudentum (BZNW 44; Bedin: de Gruyter, 1978) 125-43. 64. J. E. Crouch, The Origin and Intention of the Colossian Haustafel (FRLANT 109; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1972) 84-101; M. Kuchler, FrUhjiidische Weisheitstraditionen: Zum Fortgang weisheitlichen Denkens im Bereich des friihjUdischen Jahweglauben (OBO 26; Freiburg: Universitaisverlag; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1979) 207-318; Niebuhr, Gesetz und Pardnese, 5-72. 65. Cf. Berger {Die Gesetzauslegung, 151), who claims that Philo and Josephus derive their formulation of the twofold obligation to eusebeia and dikaiosyne from Greek rather than from biblical tradition. 66. Crouch, The Origin and Intention, 84-88. 67. Ibid., 87. On Buzyges, see L. Schmidt, Die Ethik der alten Griechen (Bedin: Hertz, 1882) 2:278-79; H. Bolkestein, Wohltdtigkeit und Armenpflege im vorchristlichen Altertum (Utrecht: Oosthoek, 1939) 69-70. 68. M. Guttmann, Das Judentum und seine JJmwelt (Berlin: Philo Verlag, 1927); Crouch, The Origin and Intention, 92-95. On the Noachian laws, see L. Ginzberg, The Legends o/rfte yeivj (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1955) 5:92n.55 and especially D. Novak, The Image of the Non-Jew in Judaism (New York: Mellen, 1983). The most frequently mentioned laws were against blasphemy, idolatry, incest, murder, robbery, eating meat torn from a living animal, and the commandment to establish civil law.

THE COMMON ETHIC

171

tradition is attested in the book of Jubilees in the seeond century B.C.E.^^ The relevance of the Noachian tradition for our purpose lies not so much in the content of the laws, but in the very idea of a code to which Gentiles were responsible. Yet, while the Noachian laws provide a parallel for universalistic ethics in Rabbinic Judaism, there is no reason to suppose that the Hellenistic codes were actually derived from them. The crucial difference, as Crouch has noted, is that the Rabbinic sources clearly differentiate between the laws that apply to Jews and those that apply to Gentiles, while the Hellenistic Jewish codes do not.™ While the thesis of G. Klein that the common material in Philo, Josephus, and Pseudo-Phocylides reflected an actual catechism for proselytes is not sustained by the evidence,''' there is no doubt that there was a well-established tradition in Diaspora Judaism, formed most probably in the synagogue service. An author such as Philo could elaborate this tradition and give it a philosophical basis in terms of the law of nature and the law of God, but it is reflected in a wide variety of Jewish writings from the second century B.C.E. on. The sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides have rightly been regarded as the major repository of the ethics of Hellenistic Judaism apart from Philo, although they have too often been treated in isolation. The sayings of Pseudo-Phocylides have obvious affinities with the Jewish wisdom literature,^^ but the very choice of the pseudonym Phocylides emphasizes rather the relationship to the Greek genres of didactic poetry and gnomologies.'^ Since the composition is a collection of sentences rather than a coherent exposition,'''* the affinities with the gnomologies are the most obvious. The original Phocylides was, in fact, a gnomic poet. Collections of gnomai had been made from the fifth century on and were promoted in the philosophical schools by such eminent figures as Epicurus and Chrysippus.''^ The choice of this genre already says much about the framework in which the ethical teachings are placed. The choice of a Greek pseudonym rules out any 69. Jubilees 7:20, 28 lists the commandments of Noah to his sons. The actual commandments differ from the later Noachian laws. They include commands to observe righteousness, bless the creator, honor father and mother, love the neighbor, and avoid fornication, uncleanness, and bloodshed. 70. Crouch, The Origin and Intention, 95. 71. G. Klein, Der dlteste Christiiche Katechismus und die Jiidische PropagandaLiteratur (Berlin: Reimer, 1909). 72. See further Collins, Jewish Wisdom, 166-73. 73. Van der Horst, The Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides, 77-80. 74. See however Wilson, The Mysteries of Righteousness, who argues with some success for a sophisticated literary structure. 75. K. Homa, "Gnome, Gnomendichtung, Gnomologien," PWRE Supp 6 (1935) 74-90; Kiichler, FrUhjUdische Weisheitstraditionen, 236-61, surveys the relevant Greek gnomologies. See also Derron, Pseudo-Phocylide, VII-XXVI; Wilson, The Mysteries of Righteousness, 1541.

172


appeal to the revelatory status of Jewish law. The teachings claim their validity as natural law. Since the traditional sayings of Phocylides were regarded as useful for educational purposes/^ it may be that the author wished to infiltrate Greek moral education. If so, we must assume that he was interested in spreading his values, not Judaism as such, since it is never explicitly mentioned. The character of the sentences has already been indicated in the comments above on the material shared with Philo and Josephus. Monotheism is implicit throughout, despite a few apparent polytheistic references. Verse 98 (metra de teuche theoisi) Is scarcely intelligible and must be emended.''^ Verses 75 and 163 refer to the heavenly bodies as "blessed ones." Verse 104 says that the dead become theoi. Neither the reference to the "blessed ones" nor that to the theoi in verse 104 is incompatible with monotheism. The latter case is simply a variant on the common Jewish idea that the righteous dead become angels or mingle with the a n g e l s . Y e t it must be said that monotheism is not an explicit issue in Pseudo-Phocylides as it is in Philo. Usually the author refers simply to "god" without qualification, a procedure which had ample precedent in philosopbical and gnomic writings. Only once, in verse 54, does he specify that heis theos esti sophos. While the phrase heis theos often appears as "geradezu terminus technicus der monotheistischen Missionspredigt"^^ and also recalls the Shema (Deut. 6:4), the context here ("pride not yourself on wisdom") suggests that the phrase means "only God is wise." The unqualified references to "god" result in a practical monotheism. Yet no warning is given to the non-Jewish reader that verses 98, 104, or 163 should not be read in a polytheistic sense. Evidently Pseudo-Phocylides was more concerned with the ethics one practiced than with the gods one worshipped. The poem is exceptional in Hellenistic Jewish literature in its failure to condemn idolatry. This apparent softness on polytheism and idolatry minimizes the disjunction from Hellenistic civil and social life required of the convert to Judaism, but also of the Jew who wished to participate fully in Hellenistic life, and the God-fearing pagan, who may not have broken with polytheism at alL^° The interest in sexual offenses is apparent already in verse 3. Practical advice is added in verses 210-17: "Guard the youthful beauty of a comely 76. Isocrates, Ad Nicoclem 42-43 {cited by van der Horst, 60). 77. Van der Horst {The Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides, 180) translates Bemays's emendation gooisi for theoisi ("Be moderate in your grief) 78. Ibid., 186-88. 79. Ibid., 151, citing R. Kerst,"l Kor. 8,6 — ein vorpaulinisches Taufbekenntnis?" ZWW 66(1975) 130-39. Cf. Philo, De Opificio Mundi Letter of Aristeas 132; Sib. Or. 3:11-12; frag. 1:7-8, 32; frag. 3:3. 80. On the problem of monotheism for God-fearers, see F. Siegert, "Gottesfurchtige und Sympathisanten," JSJ 4 (\913) 140-47.

THE COMMON ETHIC

173

boy, because many rage for intercourse with a man. Guard a virgin in firmly locked rooms. . . . " The basis of the advice is natural law: "even animals are not pleased by intercourse of male with male" (v. 191), as Plato had also argued. The denunciadon extends to lesbianism: "Let not women Imitate the sexual role of men" (v. 192).^' Here the author indulges in a little uncharacteristic demythologizing: "eros is not a god but a passion destructive of all" (v. 194). Yet Pseudo-Phocylides simply takes the keeping of concubines for granted, as Indeed it was never strongly condemned in antiquity even in the Bible or postbiblical Jewish writers. The greater part of Pseudo-Phocylides Is taken up with the network of social reladons, especially those within the family, but also those in society at large. The concern for the poor is conspicuous, though not disdncdve in either Greek or Jewish traditions. Slavery is taken for granted, but a humane atdtude is recommended. Money is the root of all evil (v. 42) — a sendment widely shared in antiquity. Most of the sentences are quite commonplace in both Jewish and Hellenistic ethics. Many have a distinctly Greek ring — e.g., "moderation is best of all" (v. 69). There is scarcely any concern for cultic matters. Verse 228 says that "purifications are for the purity of the soul, not of the body." This sentiment is significant as a widespread attitude of Hellenistic Judaism, which was in turn shaped by the spiritualizing philosophy of the Greeks. The purpose for which Pseudo-Phocylides was written has not been definitively established. In his 1978 commentary, van der Horst left three possibilities open:^^ that the author wrote for his fellow Jews; that he wrote for a pagan public, hoping to make them "sympathizers" of Judaism; and that he was actually a "God-fearer" who wished to promote his way of life. More recently, he has dismissed the idea that Pseudo-Phocylides was intended for a pagan audience and suggested that the work was intended as "a kind of compendium of misvot for daily life which could help Jews in a thoroughly Hellenistic environment to live as Jews without having to abandon their interest in Greek culture."^* It is true that the book cannot have been intended to win converts to Judaism, since there is no overt reference to Judaism in the text. But neither is it clear that the sayings were intended to reinforce adherence to Judaism, for the same reason. Gnomologies usually served the purpose of education, and Pseudo-Phocylides was used for this purpose in later times. The 81. Biblical law does not address the question of lesbianism, but it is condemned in the Talmud, Yebamot 76a, and the condemnation is implied already in the New Testament in Rom. 1:26. See B. J. Brooten, Love between Women: Early Christian Responses to Homoeroticism (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996) 239-53. 82. Van der Horst, The Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides, 231. 83. Ibid., 70-76. 84. Van der Horst, "Pseudo-Phocylides Revisited," 16; cf. Niebuhr, Gesetz und Pardnese, 67.

174


teacher who authored these verses was probably a wisdom teacher like Ben Sira. In advertising his teachings under the name of Phocylides, he hoped to attract students regardless of whether they were Jewish or not. His purpose was not to convert, but to educate in gnomic wisdom. His subject was morality, and in this he was no different from any Greek philosopher who set up a school. The fact that his understanding of morality was shaped by Jewish scriptures and tradition was incidental. He did not even inform his readers of the existence of the scriptures, any more than he lectured them on Plato or the Stoics. The only purpose that we can safely impute to him was to impart his understanding of the moral life to his readers, whether they were Jew or Gentile. Whatever the primary audience envisaged by the author, his work is remarkable for its distillation of the ethical message of Judaism and its suppression of the distinctive indicators of Judaism as a religion set apart. This was the kind of religion which could be embraced by a God-fearer without becoming a Jew. If the work was written by a Jew rather than by a God-fearer, it provides a remarkable insight into the Hellenization of Diaspora Judaism. The persistence of the attitude expressed in Pseudo-Phocylides is attested in the Words of the Wise Menander, which has been preserved in Syriac but is thought to have been composed in Greek, in Egypt, towards the end of the second century CE.^^ The monotheism of Pseudo-Menander is not in doubt, but this, combined with allusions to Jewish wisdom tradition, is the only indication of the Jewish provenance of the work. Even the Mosaic laws are not reflected. Here again there is doubt as to the origin and purpose of the work. Audet suggested that it was the work of a God-fearer. This suggestion cannot be verified, but at least we can say that Pseudo-Menander illustrates the common ground between Jewish and Hellenistic ethical traditions and that such common ground could still be exploited in the late second century C.E.

T h e Testaments of the Twelve

Patriarchs

Another possible window on the ethics of Hellenistic Judaism is provided by the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. In this case, however, the evidence can be adduced only very tentatively since the provenance of the Testaments is notoriously problematic. Three main current views may be distinguished. The position which has been dominant since the late nineteenth century holds that the Testaments are Jewish but interpolated by a Christian. Variant 85. J. P Audet, "La sagesse de Menandre I'Egyptien," RB 59 (1952) 55-81; Kiichler, Weisheitstraditionen, 303-18.

THE COMMON ETHIC

175

forms of this view have been defended in recent years by J. Becker, A. Hultgard, H. C. Kee, and J. H. Ulrichsen, among o t h e r s . T h e theory of Christian authorship, which had been dominant before the late nineteenth century, was revived in 1953 by M. de Jonge.^'' He has modified his position in recent years but condnues to insist on the importance of the final stage of the Testaments and the difficulty of going behind it.^^ The third position, that the Testaments are an Essene composition from Qumran, has been championed mainly by A. Dupont-Sommer and M. Philonenko.^^ Despite a number of important parallels between the Testaments and the Dead Sea Scrolls, there are also far-reaching differences, and this position has won little support in recent years. Much of the debate has centered on text-critical matters. Here it may be said that the attempts of R. H. Charles and others to remove Christian interpolations by text-critical arguments have been thoroughly undermined by the work of de Jonge and his students on the Greek text and of C. Burchard and M. E. Stone on the Armenian.^'' There is no longer room for doubt that the final text of the Testaments is a Christian document. It is also clear that attempts to go behind this stage are inevitably hypothetical. Yet the presence of much Jewish material is undeniable, and even de Jonge admits that to speak of Christian composition is an oversimplification.^^ The work of Jurgen Becker may stand as a representative example of recent attempts to trace the redaction history of the Testaments. Becker distinguishes two Jewish stages and a Christian redaction.The earliest stage was molded by the testament form. This was later expanded by the incorporation of traditional, usually hortatory, material. Becker reduces the Christian elements to the undeniable minimum, although, as de Jonge has repeatedly pointed out, much of the material could have been written by either Christian or Jew. It 86. J. Becker, Vntersuchungen zur Entstehungsgeschichte der Testamente der zwdlf Palriarchen (AGJU 8; Leiden: Brill, 1970); idem, Die Testamente der zwdlf Patriarchen (JSHRZ 3.1; Gutersloh: Mohn, 1980); A. Hultg&rd, VEschatologie des Testaments des Douze Patriarches. 1. Interpretation des textes (Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1977); H. C. Kee, "Ethical Dimensions of the Testaments of the XII as a Clue to Provenance," NTS 24 (1978) 259-70; idem, "The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs," in OTP. 1:775-828; J. H. Ulrichsen, Die Grundschrift der Testamente der Zwdlf Patriarchen: Eine Untersuchung zu Umfang, Inhalt, und Eigenart der ursprUnglichen Schrift (Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1991). 87. M. de Jonge, The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs: A Study of Their Text, Composition, and Origin (Assen: van Gorcum, 1953); idem. Studies onjhe Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs: Text and Interpretation (SVTP 3; Leiden: Brill, 1975). 88. H. W. Hollander and M. de Jonge, The Testatnents of the Twelve Patriarchs: A Commentary (Leiden: Brill, 1985). 89. A. Dupont-Sommer, Nouveaux apergus sur les manuscrits de la Mer Morte (Paris: Maisonneuve, 1953); M. Philonenko, Les Interpolations chritiennes des Testaments des Douze Patriarches et les manuscrits de Qoumr&n (Paris: Presses universitaires de France, 1960). 90. For a summary, see de Jonge, Studies, 120-39, H. J. de Jonge, ibid., 63-86. 91. J. J. ColHns, "Testaments," in M. E. Stone, ed., Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period (CRINT 2.2; Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984) 325-55. 92. Becker, Die Testamente, 23-27.

176


should also be said that the distinction between Becker's two Jewish stages rests on the assumption that different formal units may be ascribed to different sources. While an assumption of multiple stages is reasonable in itself, the distinction of Becker's two Jewish sh-ata remains quite hypothetical. Becker and others have argued that the Jewish stages of the Testaments originated in the Hellenistic Diaspora.^^ It is now widely agreed that Greek was the original language,^* and the ethics of the Testaments find many parallels in works of the Diaspora.^^ Of course neither of these points is conclusive. Greek was widely known in Palestine, and much of the ethical material is also paralleled in early Christian writing. A more specific indication of Egyptian origin may be found in the prominence of Joseph, not only in the Testament of Joseph but also in the Testaments of Reuben, Simeon, Dan, Gad, and Benjamin. This interest in Joseph is most readily comprehensible in an Egyptian document. Yet other explanations are also possible. J. Thomas suggested that the Testaments were written in Palestine for circulation in the Diaspora.^^ M. Kiichler attributes them to Hellenized Palestinian J u d a i s m . I n both cases, the scholars are trying to balance the Hellenistic elements against the parallels in Qumran and Palestinian Jewish literature. While there is a consensus that the Testaments are heavily Hellenized, there is no clarity on the more precise question of provenance. The date of the Jewish strata of the Testaments is equally uncertain. E. J. Bickerman argued that the original Testaments were written before the Maccabean revolt, and he has been widely followed.^^ In T. Levi 17:11 the priests of the seventh week, who immediately precede the "new priest" of the eschatological age, are denounced as "idolaters, adulterers, lovers of money, proud, lawless, lascivious, abusers of children and beasts." This denunciation has been applied to the Hellenizers before the Maccabean revolt, although a polemic against the priesthood of the Hasmoneans cannot be absolutely ex93. So also K. H. Rengstorff, "Herkunft und Sinn der Patriarchen Reden in den Testamenten der zwolf Patriarchen." in W. C. van Unnik, ed.. La Litterature Juive entre Tenach et Mischna (Leiden: Brill, 1974) 28-47. It is not disputed that older Semitic traditions, now attested at Qumran, were incorporated. Kee states that "the basic writing gives no evidence of having been composed by anyone other than a hellenized Jew" (p. 277), but opts for Syria rather than Egypt as the place of origin. 94. Ulrichsen, Die Grundsclirift, 343, however, argues for an original composition in Hebrew or Aramaic, in Palestine, about 200 B . C . E . 95. See the parallels adduced in the commentary of Hollander and de Jonge. Also H. W. Hollander, Josepli as an Ethical Model in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (Leiden: Brill, 1981). Niebuhr, Gesetz und Parandse, 84-86, stresses the uncertainty of provenance but discusses the material largely in the context of Diaspora traditions. 96. J. Thomas, "Aktuelles in Zeugnis der zwolf Vater," in W. Eltester. ed., Studien zu den Testamenten der zwolf Patriarchen (BZNW 36, Berlin: Topelmann, 1969) 62-150. 97. Kiichler, FrUhjUdische Weisheitstraditionen, 431-545. 98. E. J. Bickerman, "The Date of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs," in idem. Studies in Jewish and Christian History, 2:1-23 (first published in JBL 69 [1950] 245-60).

THE COMMON ETHIC

177

eluded. T. Naphtali 5:8 says that "Assyrians, Medes, Persians, Chaldeans, Syrians, shall possess in captivity the twelve tribes of Israel." Since no reference is made to the Romans, this passage must at least be dated before Pompey, and it was probably written before the expulsion of the Syrians in 141 B.C.E. It cannot be earlier than 200 B.C.E. since it presupposes Syrian, not Ptolemaic, rule in Palestine. The lack of any reference to the Maccabean revolt has been taken as an argument for a pre-Maccabean dating, but this is unreliable, since the silence may be due to lack of sympathy. The prominence of the double messiahship of Levi and Judah, one of the more striking, if inexact, parallels with the Qumran Scrolls, which also expect two messiahs, has often been taken as a criticism of the Hasmonean usurpation of the priesthood. It seems likely that there was a gradual process of growth in the formation of the Testaments, and so no single dating is valid for all the pre-Chrisuan material. Uldmately, the ethics of the Testaments cannot be pinpointed as the product of a specific situation. They are of interest for our purpose as material which seems to have accumulated and circulated in Hellenized Jewish circles over two hundred years and which was eventually taken over by Chrisdanity.

The Testaments and the Covenant Form The oudine of the Testaments shows close similarity to the traditional covenant form, which would seem, prima facie, to bind them to the tradidonal covenantal ethic. The form may be set forth as follows: A. A preamble which gives the name of the patriarch and the circumstances in which he delivered his testament shortly before his death. B. A narrative section in which each of the patriarchs recounts stories from his life. T. Asher is an exception on this point. C. A set of ethical instmctions, D. A prediction of the future of the tribe, usually with an eschatological conclusion. E. A conclusion which describes the death and burial of the patriarch. Points A and E are the distinctively testamentary elements in the outiine.^^ Becker has argued that the earliest stage of the Testaments is already 99. K, Baltzer, The Covenant Formulary (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1971). On the form of the Testatnents, see further E. von Nordheim, Die Lehre der Alten: Das Testament als Gliedgattung im Judentum der Hellenistisch-Romtschen Zeit (Leiden: Brill, 1980); G. W. E. Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature between the Bible and Mishnah: A Historical and Literaty Introduction (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981) 231-41.

178


shaped by the covenant form. So, for example, in T. Reuben we find a historical section, the example from the life of the patriarch in 3:11-15. Ethical instruction is found in the repeated warnings against adultery and again in 6:9: "1 charge you, by the God of heaven to deal honestly, each one with his neighbor, and to have love, each one for his brother." This is followed by a promise of blessing in 6:10-12. This outline provides a framework within which longer hortatory passages were later inserted. In T. Joseph the historical example is found in chapters 10-17. An exhortation to follow the law and a promise of blessing follow in 18:1-2. Both T. Reuben and T. Joseph are exceptional in the brevity of their predictions at the end. The majority of the testaments included in their earliest stage a prophecy of the sin, punishment, and restoration of the people, which illustrates the elements of curse and blessing in the covenant form. A number of important differences between the testament form of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs and the Old Testament covenant form should be noted. In the Old Testament covenant (e.g., Deuteronomy), the review of history served to remind the people of Yahweh's saving acts and therefore of their obligation to him. In the Testaments, the historical element consists of stories from the lives of the patriarchs which illustrate a virtue or vice. K. Baltzer emphasizes that the relationship between the patriarch and God is more important than the particular virtue or vice, and he notes the continuity with Jewish wisdom literature.'^'^ Nevertheless, history is used here as a source of moral examples to an extent which has no precedent in the Bible. The best parallels to the Testaments in this respect are found in writings of the Hellenistic Diaspora such as 4 Maccabees, The transformation of history into moral example is carried to an extreme in the allegorical commentaries of Philo, where, for example, in De Abrahamo 1-46 Enosh symbolizes hope, Enoch repentance, and Noah justice. Similar symbolic meanings are elsewhere attached to the major figures of the Pentateuch. Further, the emphasis on abstract, generalized virtues and vices which we find in the Testaments differs from the direct commands of the bibhcal D e c a l o g u e . T h e interest in abstract virtues is characteristic of Greek philosophy rather than of the Bible, although catalogues of virtues and vices are found at Qumran, and some parallels can also be found in the biblical tradition.

100. Baltzer, The Covenant Formulary, 145. 101. Cf. Berger, Die Gesetzauslegung, 388.

THE COMMON ETHIC

179

The Content of the Exhortations The ethical exhortations in the Testaments are expressed pardy through the example of the patriarchs and partly through direct parenesis (often through lists of virtues and vices). The narrative section on each patriarch focuses on some virtue or vice. The story of Reuben illustrates the evil of fornication; that of Simeon, envy; Judah, inebriation and fornication. On the credit side, Issachar illustrates single-mlndedness and Zebulun provides a model of compassion. Joseph serves as a foil to many of the patriarchs by his chastity, despite the advances of the Egyptian woman, and by his forgiving love for the brothers who sold him into slavery. These two virtues are illustrated in T. Joseph 3-9 and 10:5-20:6, respectively. The theme of brotherly love plays a prominent part in the Testaments. This love is extended not only to the people of Israel but to all humankind (e.g., T Issachar 5:2; 7:6; T. Zebulun 5:1; 6:4; 6:7; 7:2; 8:1; Z Benjamin 4:2). Such universalism Is rare in Jewish writings of the Hellenistic period. Most of the parallels are found in Hellenized writings from the Diaspora.'''^ It Is not, of course, impossible that such sentiments should be expressed In Palestine, but the evidence may be taken to favor a setting in the Diaspora.

Homiletic Material in the Testaments In view of the strongly parenetic character of the Testaments, it is only natural that they should draw on the homiletic practice of the synagogue. While we do not find in the Testaments any actual sermons, we do find blocks of apparently traditional material which form units independent of their present context and which may well have been shaped by homiletic tradition. We may distinguish three types of homiletic material in the Testaments, all of them interrelated: First is the exposition of a particular vice or virtue, with the aid of biblical examples; second are lists of vices and/or virtues; and third are passages which put such lists in a dualistic context, for example, by elaborating the contrast of the two ways. 1. The exposition of particular virtues with the aid of biblical examples is a typical feature of the Testaments. The discourse on fornication in T. Reuben 3:10-4:5; 4:6-6:5 provides a good example. First, the patriarch declares his theme: "Pay no attention to a woman's face . . . " (3:10). He then provides 102. E.g., 4 Mace. 2:14; Philo. De Virtutibus 109-24, Cf. Letter of Aristeas 225-30; Joseph andAseneth 28-29. See Becker, Vntersuchungen, 377-401; Berger, Die Gesetzauslegung, 120; W. Harrelson, "Patient Love in the Testament of Joseph," in G. W. E. Nickelsburg, ed.. Studies on the Testament of Joseph {SCS 5; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1975) 29-35. On the role of Joseph, see Hollander, Joseph as an Ethical Model.

180


as an illustration his misdemeanor with Bilhah (3:11-15) and concludes with the exhortation to "pay no attention to women's beauty . . . " (4:1-5). This exhortation is complete in itself but is supplemented in 4:6-6:5 with another, similarly structured sermon, which may well be a redactional addition. Again, the patriarch begins by enunciating his theme: "For fornication is destruction to the soul." This time the example adduced is that of Joseph: "how he avoided women and kept his mind pure from all thoughts of fornication" (4:8). The evil of women is further illustrated by the story of the fall of the Watchers before the Flood (5:1-7). Finally, the exhortation concludes, "beware then of fornication" (6:1).'"^ The biblical incidents are included here specifically as illustrations of a vice or virtue and its effects. We should note that the form of T. Reuben 3:104:5 or 4:6-6:5 cannot be adequately explained by analogy with the covenant form. These passages do not simply recite history and then draw a moral from it. They begin with the declaration of a theme, illustrate it by historical (scriptural) example(s), and conclude with an exhortation. Therefore, they constitute a rounded self-contained homily within the testament.'*'* We may compare the list of examples of faith and the exhortation to perseverance in Hebrews 11-12. Similarly, in T. Joseph 2:4-10:3 we have a self-contained piece of exhortation. The patriarch begins by announcing his theme of hypomone or endurance (2:7). He illustrates this at length from his adventures with the Egyptian woman (chaps. 3-9). The discourse concludes with the repetition of the moral: "So you see, my children, what great things endurance can do" (J0:1) and an exhortation, "and you too — if you strive for chastity and purity with endurance and humility of heart . . . the Lord will dwell among you . . ." (10:2-3). Similar homiletic passages are found in T. Simeon 2:5-5:3 and T. Judah 13-17. It should be noted that the theme of chastity/fornication enjoys special prominence in the parenetic passages of the Testaments. 2. The second type of hortatory material included in the Testaments consists of lists of vices and virtues. '"^ In Palestinian Judaism such Hsts are found 103. Translations of the Testaments are taken from M. de Jonge, "The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs," in H. F. D. Sparks, ed.. The Apocryplml Old Testament (Oxford: Clarendon, 1984), with minor modifications. 104. On the structure of homilies in the Hellenistic synagogue, see especially P. Borgen, Bread from Heaven: An Exegetical Study of the Concept of Manna in the Gospel of Jolin and the Writings of Fhilo (Leiden: Brill, 1965) 28-58. Borgen stresses the use of scriptural quotations both as main text and as subordinate illustrations of the theme. His main examples are drawn from Philo. 105. The ascetic tendencies of the Testaments are noted by R. Eppel, Le Pietisme Juif dans hs Testaments des Doiize Patriarches (Paris: Alcan, 1930) 154-57. 106. A. Vogtle, Die Tugend- und Laslerkataloge im Neuen Testament (MUnster: Aschendorff, 1936); S. Wibbing, Die Tugend- und Laslerkataloge in Neuen Testament (Tubingen: Mohr, 1964); H. Conzelmann, / Corinthians (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975) 100.

THE COMMON ETHIC

181

in the Qumran texts, where different virtues are assigned to the Spirit of Truth and vices to the Spirit of Perversity. The closest parallel to the Scrolls in the Testaments is found in T. Reuben 2-3, which lists seven spirits that "are appointed against man": the spirits of fornication, insatiableness, fighting, obsequiousness, pride, lying, and injustice. Catalogues of vices and virtues also occur frequendy in Stoic philosophy and in the popular diatribe.'^^ In a number of testaments, the consequences of a particular virtue or vice are elaborated in the form of a list. So in T. Benjamin 6 we read: The good man's impulse is not in the power of the error of the spirit of Beliar, for the angel of peace acts as a guide to his soul. And he does not look with greedy eyes on things that perish, nor does he pile up riches and dehght in them. He takes no delight in pleasure; he causes his neighbor no pain; he does not overload himself with luxuries, nor is he led astray by a lustful eye, for the Lord is all in all to him. His good impulse acknowledges neither honor nor dishonor from men, neither does it countenance any deceit, or lie, or strife or reviling His good mind will not let him speak with two tongues. In T. Issachar 4:2-6 we read that the simple-hearted man does not covet gold, is not jealous of his neighbor, is not concerned for variety in his food, is not always wanting different clothes, makes no plans for a long life, but waits on the will of God alone. In both these passages a virtue, or a virtuous man, is described by a list of negatives. Precedents for lists of this type can be found in the "confessional" passages of the Old Testament such as Deut. 26:13b-14: "I have not transgressed any of thy commandments, neither have I forgotten them. I have not eaten of the tithe while I was mourning or removed any of it while I was unclean or offered any of it to the dead; I have obeyed the voice of the LORD my God." Further examples can be found in 1 Sam. 12:3; Job 31:16-18; or in the Egyptian Book of the Dead. In each of these cases, a man declares himself innocent by enumerating the sins which he has not committed. The analogy with the Testaments is obvious, but also limited.'''^ Here the speaker is no 107. For Stoic texts, see H. F. A. von Amim, ed.. Stoicorum Velenini Fragnienla (4 vols.; Leipzig: Teubner, 1903-24) 3: nos. 377-490. 108. See especially G. von Rad, "Die Vorgeschichte der Gattung von 1 Kor 13:4-7," in Geschichte und Altes Testament: Albrecht Alt zum siebsigsten Geburtstag (Ttibingen: Mohr, 1953) 153-68. Cf. also Psalm 24; Ezek. 18:5-9; Jer. 17:5-8.

182


longer simply a man, but a man who embodies a particular virtue. The sharply increased interest in the virtues as such is a characteristic of the Hellenistic age. We may note again Philo's use of the patriarchs as allegories of virtues. Philo also makes frequent use of lists of vices and virtues. The influence of Greek popular philosophy is very probable in the catalogues of vices and virtues in Paul and Philo, and it cannot be discounted in the Testaments. These catalogues can also be viewed as an adaptation of a biblical tradition, but we must allow for the possibility that Jewish preachers deliberately modeled their style on that of their Stoic and Cynic counterparts.^''^ 3. Dualistic framework: It is typical of the Testaments that virtues and vices are contrasted in pairs — for example, the fornication of Reuben with the chasdty of Joseph, or the envy of Simeon with the forgiving love of Joseph. Consequently, the catalogues of vices and virtues imply an ethical dualism in which two contrasting ways of life are set forth. This is most fully developed in the doctrine of the two ways in T. Asher (1:3-8): Two ways has God appointed for humankind and two impulses and two kinds of action and two courses and two ends. Thus all things are in twos, one over against the other. There are two ways of good and evil, and along with these are the two impulses in our breasts that make the distinctions between them. So if the soul is well disposed to what is good, its every action is in righteousness. . . . But if the soul inclines the impulse to wickedness, its every action is in wickedness. The doctrine of the two ways has roots in the ethics of the Bible, especially in the wisdom tradition.'"** Proverbs 4:10-14 sets out the contrast: "I have taught you the way of wisdom; I have led you in the paths of uprightness. . . . Do not enter the path of the wicked and do not walk in the way of evil men." The contrast between Dame Wisdom and Dame Folly in Proverbs 9 similarly implies the opposition of two ways. Psalm 1:6 says that "the LORD knows the way of the righteous, but the way of the wicked will perish," The doctrine of the two ways does not derive from the biblical covenant but was obviously compatible with it. We may compare Deut. 30:15: "See, I have set before you this day life and good, death and evil." There is no implication of metaphysical dualism in any of these texts. They simply clarify basic options by formulating them in terms of binary oppositions. Such con109. H. Thyen, Der Slil der Jiidisch-Hellenutischen Homilie (Gcittingeii: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1955), following the basic study of Bultmann, Der Stil der paulinischen Predigt und die kynisch-stoische Diatribe (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1910). Becker {Untersuchungen, 194) has shown how well Thyen's analysis can be applied to the parenetic passages in the Testaments. 110. W. Michaelis, "hodos," TDNT5 (1967) 42-96, esp. 56-65, where he traces biblical influence on the intertestamental writings.

THE COMMON ETHIC

183

trasts are probably found universally. In Hesiod's Works and Days 287-92 we read: "Badness can be got easily and in shoals: the road to her is smooth, and she lives very near us. But between us and Goodness the gods have placed the sweat of our brows: long and steep is the path that leads to her, and it is rough at first."*'' The Testament ofAsher goes beyond this purely ethical dualism when it refers to the evil spirit and the angel of peace. In this respect, it draws closer to the metaphysical dualism of the Qumran Scrolls. It is apparent, however, that the schema of the two ways was in itself quite intelligible to a Hellenistic audience.

The Ethic of the Testaments The ethics of the Testaments resemble the Diaspora writings in their tendency to ignore the distinctive elements of Judaism and to emphasize those which would be acceptable to sophisticated Gentiles. Despite numerous references to the law (nomos and entole are used over sixty times), the ethics are presented in broad moral terms. There is no reference to the Sabbath. Circumcision is mentioned only in the Testament of Levi in connection with the destruction of Shechem, not in the context of positive teaching. The Jewish cult is only discussed in connection with the eschatological priest. Purity laws are cited in T Asher 2:9 and 4:5 but are applied metaphorically to characterize types of sinners. The emphasis is on the virtues inculcated by the Testaments, not on specific commandments. The most specific point of continuity with such documents as the Sibylline Oracles and Pseudo-Phocylides lies in the insistent polemic against fornication. The Testaments are closer to the sibyl than to Pseudo-Phocylides in their avoidance of any language which could be taken as polytheistic and in their political and eschatological interests. The sense of Jewish identity is reinforced by the choice of Jewish pseudonyms, and by the expectation of the restoration of Israel in the messianic age. Unlike the sibyl, however, the 7^5taments do not try to delineate the virtues of Judaism in contrast to Gentile vices, such as idolatry and homosexuality. There is no sense here of a polemical debate with the Gentile world. The teaching is presented within a purely Jewish context, the patriarchs instructing their children. But the ethical teaching itself is highly Hellenized and scarcely distinctive in the context of Hellenistic Judaism.

111. Cf. also Heracles' choice between the ways of vice and virtue in Xenophon, Memorabilia 2.1.21-34. 112. Kee, "Ethical Dimensions," 259-70; Berger, Gesetzauslegung, 42-45.

184


T h e Role of the S y n a g o g u e The eommon ethic which we have seen in such diverse writings as PseudoPhocyhdes, the Sibylline Oracles, and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs was pervasive in Hellenistic Judaism. We will find it, with few exceptions, in the more philosophically and mystically inclined works which we shall discuss in the following chapters. Throughout, there is a tendency to bypass the distinctive laws of Judaism and concentrate on monotheism and matters of social and sexual morality. This tendency constitutes a unifying element among writings which are diverse in their political attitudes and in the details of their teaching. Such unity as we find in the ethics of Hellenistic Judaism must be attributed to the influence of the synagogue preaching.''^ We have noted the formal traces of homilies in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. Other examples can be found in Philo."* We have little direct information about the preaching of the synagogue, but there is ample evidence that it played a central role in Diaspora hfe. An indication of the role of the synagogue may be taken from Philo, if due allowance is made for his tendency to portray Judaism as a philosophy: So each seventh day there stand wide open in every city thousands of schools of good sense, temperance, courage, justice and the other virtues in which the scholars sit in order, quietly, with ears alert and with full attention, so much do they thirst for the draught which the teacher's words supply, while one of special experience rises and sets forth what is best and sure to be profitable and wall make the whole of life grow to something better. But among the vast number of particular truths and principles there studied, there stand out practically high above the others two main heads; one of duty to God as shown by piety and holiness, one of duty to men as shown by humanity and justice.''^ The reduction of the law to the "two main heads" (dyo ta anotato kephalaia) of duties towards God and humanity is especially significant and is characteristic of Hellenistic Judaism."^ The role of the synagogue also throws some light on the recurring ques113. See especially Georgi, The Opponents, 84-91. 114, Borgen, Breadfrom Heaven, 28-58. U5. De Specialibus Legibus 2.62-63 §282. The term translated "thousands" (myna) may be taken as "numerous." See also Philo, De Vita Mosis 2.216 ^168. 116. See esp. Berger, Die Gesetzauslegung, 137-16. For comparison with Rabbinic material, see A. Nissen, Gott und der NUchste im antil(en Judentum (WUNT 15; Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1974).

THE COMMON ETHIC

185

tion of whether this presentation of Judaism was designed primarily for the Jewish community or was addressed to the Gentile world. The synagogue was evidenUy a major place of instrucdon for the Jewish community. Yet it was also open to Gentiles and did in fact attract them. Josephus reports that the Jews of Antioch "were constantly attracting to their religious ceremonies muldtudes of Greeks, and these they had in some measure incorporated with themselves" (J.W. 7.3.3 §45).^^^ This report accords well with the book of Acts, where Paul is repeatedly said to encounter God-fearing Gendles in the synagogues."^ No doubt the teaching of the synagogue was primarily directed toward the Jewish audience, but the interpretation of Jewish tradition presented was thoroughly Hellenistic and accessible to interested Gentiles.

117. Pagan authors were impressed by the openness of Judaism in this respect. See J. Juster, Les Juifs dans I'Empire Roniain (Paris: Geuthner, 1914) 279, 413. It is debated whether part of tlie synagogue service was reserved for Jews. 118. Acts 13:16, 26, 43, 50; 17:4, 17. Note esp. 13:44, where "almost the whole city" came to the synagogue to hear Paul. See also Millar, in Schiirer, The History of the Jewish People, 3.1:162.

CHAPTER 5

Philosophical Judaism

The Sibylline Oracles, Pseudo-Phocylides, and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs represent some of the popular formulations of Jewish ethics. There was always a tradition in Hellenistic Judaism which attempted to provide a deeper philosophical basis for its teachings. Philo was the supreme example, but he had his predecessors, even if they were less systematic in their approach. The first, and possibly most significant, of these was Aristobulus. Only fragments of his work survive, but they are sufficiently substantial to establish him as a major figure in the history of Hellenistic Judaism.'

Aristobulus The work of Aristobulus was dedicated to "Ptolemy the King." The Ptolemy in question was specified by Clement^ as Philometor. Both Clement and 1. There are five fragments of Aristobulus's work. Fragment 1 is found in Eusebius (Hist. Eccl. 7.32.16-18), where Eusebius is citing Anatolius, On the Passover. Fragments 2-5 are found in Eusebius {Praep. Evang. 8.10 and 13.12). Part of fragment 5 is also found in Praep. Evang. 7.14. Parallels to parts of fragments 2-5 are also found in Clement's Siromateis 1, 5, and 6. See C. R. HoUaday, Fragments from Hellenistic Jewish Authors. Volume III: Aristobulus (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1995); A. Yarbro Collins, "Aristobulus," in OTP, 2:83142. 2. Stromateis 1.150.1. Anatolius dates Aristobulus to the time of Philadelphus, but this is a manifest error, since Aristobulus refers to Philadelphus as the forefather of the Ptolemy for whom he wrote. See N. Walter, Der Thoraausleger Aristobulus (TU 86; Berlin: Akademie, 1964) 13-26. A shorter treatment by Walter can be found in JSHRZ 3.2:261-79. See also M. Goodman, in E. Schiirer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 B.C.-A.D. 135) (rev. and ed. G. Vermes, F. Millar, and M. Goodman; 3 vols.; Edinburgh: Clark, 1973-87) 3.1:579-87; J. M. G. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora from Alexander to

186

PHILOSOPHICAL JUDAISM

187

Eusebius identify Aristobulus with the "Aristobulus . . . teaeher of Ptolemy the king" who is addressed in 2 Mace. 1:10. The identification and dating in Clement and Eusebius are probably inferred from 2 Maccabees and have accordingly been challenged. Bickerman has shown that the salutation form in 2 Mace. 1:10 only became current about 60 B.C.E.^ It seems probable that the forger of 2 Mace. 1:10 knew the work of Aristobulus with the dedication to the king and inferred that Aristobulus was the king's teacher. 2 Maccabees 1:10, then, only shows that Aristobulus's work was current in the mid-first century B.C.E. The reign of Philometor is, however, still the most likely period for a Jewish writer to dedicate his work to the king. The fact that an author dedicated a work to the king does not necessarily require that the king ever read it.* Walter has shown that the allegorical method of Aristobulus does not presuppose that of Philo^ and has also argued that Aristobulus is not dependent on Pseudo-Aristeas. The issue here concerns Aristobulus's reference to the alleged translation of the Septuagint under Philadelphus, at the instigation of Demetrius of Phalerum (Praep. Evang. 13.12.2). Since at least the reference to Demetrius is unhistorical, some scholars have assumed that Aristobulus must be dependent on Aristeas. Walter, however, argues that both may have drawn on a common tradition. The priority of Aristobulus is supported by the other parallels between the two texts.^ The scattered remarks of Pseudo-Aristeas on allegorical exegesis and the nature of God are not likely to have inspired the sustained exegesis of Aristobulus.'' The similarities between the two writers suggest close proximity in date and provenance, although Pseudo-Aristeas seems to assume some methodological steps which Aristobulus feels obliged to justify. We can hardly assume that Aristobulus was the first to apply allegorical methods to the Torah. However, if there is influence in either direction between Aristobulus and PseudoAristeas, Aristobulus would seem to be prior. The relationship between

Trajan (323 BCE-U? CE) (Edinburgh: Clarlc, 1996) 150-58; E. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism: The Reinvention of Jewish Tradition (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998) 246-51; D: Winston, "Aristobulus from Walter to HoWaday,'" .Studia Philonica Annual 8 (1996) 155-66. 3. E. J, Bickerman, Studies in Jewish and Christian History (3 vols.; AGJU 9; Leiden: Brill, 1976-86) 2:137. 4. Holladay, Fragments, 3:75. 5. Walter, Der Thoraausleger Aristobulus, 58-86, 6. Walter, Der Thoraausleger Aristobulus, 100. The fact that the passages in question are concentrated in Aristobulus but scattered in Pseudo-Aristeas is taken as evidence of the priority of Aristobulus. See further Holladay, Fragments 3:64-65. 7. Walter, Der Thoraausleger Aristobulus. 146-47, argues that Pseudo-Aristeas reflects a more advanced stage of allegorical exegesis than Aristobulus since he does not confine his allegorical interpretations to biblical anthropomorphisms. Such an argument seems hazardous, since the surviving fragments of Aristobulus are quite restricted in scope and may not reflect his full practice.

188


Aristobulus and Pseudo-Aristeas, then, supports the dadng to the dme of Philometor.^ Both Clement and Eusebius refer to Aristobulus as a Peripatedc, but he was clearly eclectic and not restricted to any one system.^ He is first and foremost a Jewish apologist.'" His entire work is a defense of the Jewish Torah against interpretations that would make it seem crude or unsophisUcated.'^ The apologetic, as always, is addressed to two fronts. On the one hand, there is the explicit address to the Gentile king and the attempt to use acceptable Hellenistic categories. On the other hand, this interpretation of Judaism is inevitably a challenge to more conservative Jews (the challenge is explicit in Praep. Evang. 8.10.5) and a reinforcement to those who thought in Hellenlsdc categories. Aristobulus's allegorical interpretation springs directly from his apologetic interests. He exhorts the king to take the interpretations physikos and not lapse into the mythical. Physikos has a technical sense in Stoic exegesis. Aristobulus's usage does not conform to that sense, but he may well have borrowed the term from the Stoics. Walter has rightly remarked that Aristobulus's lack of a technical vocabulary is an indication that he was a pioneer in this kind of Jewish exegesis.'^ His conception, in any case, is clear. Moses uses language of outward appearance to express Inward realities. So Aristobulus is led to criticize "those who have no share of power and understanding, but who are devoted to the letter alone." His criticism may, in part, be directed against Gentile critics, but his primary reference is surely to the Jewish literalists, who were still a significant faction in the time of Philo. The issue between Aristobulus and the literalists was significant. If a religion is to function as any form of nomism, the meaning of the laws must be publicly accessible. The allegorical method shifts the basis of the religion from the actual text to the understanding which provides the hidden interpretation.'^ There is obviously a relationship between this allegorical method and the visions of higher reality in Ezekiel the Tragedian and the Orphic poem, which we will consider in Chapter 6 below.

8. P M. Fraser {Ptolemaic Alexandria [Oxford: Clarendon, 1972] 2:964) holds to the priority of Pseudo-Aristeas but dates both to the age of Philometor. M. Hengel {Judaism and Hellenism [2 vols.; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974] 2:106-7) dates Aristobulus more specifically between 176 and 170 B . C . E . , since this was the only period in which Philometor was sole ruler. This, however, may place too much weight on the form in which the dedication has been preserved. 9. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, 1:164; Holladay, Fragments. 3:72-73. 10. Walter, Der Tfwraausleger Aristobulus, 43-51. 11. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 251, sees Aristobulus as giving Jews reason to have pride in their heritage by claiming that Plato plagiarized Moses. This is true, but it misses the nuances of Aristobulus's reiiiterprelation of Jewish tradition in Hellenistic categories. 12. Walter, Der Thoraausleger Aristobulus, 135. On Aristobulus's use of physikos, see Holladay, Fragments. 3:206-7. 13. On the allegorical method, see D. Dawson, Allegorical Readers and Cultural Revision in Ancient Alexandria (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992).


189

There are differences too. Aristobulus does not rely on vision (even on a vision of Moses or Abraham) but on philosophical understanding, and he shows a critical self-consciousness which is lacking In the poetic works. Aristobulus is the first theologian of Hellenistic Judaism. Aristobulus's use of allegorical interpretation is confined to the biblical anthropomorphisms — the hands, feet, "standing," and voice of God. His discussion of the Passover makes no reference to Jewish history but only to cosmic phenomena — the equinoxes of the sun and moon. The lengthy discussion of the holiness of the number seven involves no allegory but attempts to collect pagan witnesses too. The association between wisdom and light in Praep. Evang. 13.12.9-10 is not direct allegory but claims that what is said about light "might be said allegorically about wisdom also." Both in these cases and in the use of allegory, Aristobulus is guided by the underlying assumption of the unity of all truth. So the intention of the Gentile poets refers to God, even when they call him Zeus or Dis. The poets also testify to the correlation of light and wisdom. The specific contribution of Judaism is that writers like Solomon "said more clearly and better that wisdom existed before heaven and earth." The common basis is that "it is agreed by all the philosophers that it is necessary to hold holy opinions concerning God," but this is "a point our philosophical school makes particularly well." Judaism is a "philosophical school" (hairesis) among others, though it claims to be the preeminent one. One of the ways in which Aristobulus makes his point about the superiority of Judaism is by claiming that Plato and the philosophers borrowed from Moses. (In this context, Aristobulus claims that there were translations of the Torah before Philadelphus, a claim that is obviously required if Plato were to have borrowed from Moses.) While the claim may seem ridiculously arrogant, it involved a recognition that truth was indeed to be found in the pagan writers; ultimately, in Philo, it meant that Moses could be interpreted in the light of Greek philosophy. This claim had its antecedents in the popular assertions of Jewish antiquity in the romantic historians, but Aristobulus goes further. The god of the Jews and the god of the Gentiles are one. Judaism differs from the philosophical schools in degree. Judaism, in effect, is not a covenantal nomism, but a philosophy. As part of his apologetic enterprise Aristobulus cites a number of verses from Greek poets to support the idea that the seventh day is holy. Only one of these verses (Hesiod, Works and Days 770) is demonstrably authentic, although one of the Homeric verses may be based on an authentic verse, and another may have been part of the Homeric tradition of the time.'* The other 14. Walter, Der Thoraausleger Arislobulus. 150-66. The verse in question reads "And on the seventh morning we left the stream of Acheron." Since Aristobulus has to interpret this verse allegorically to make it fit his purpose, it is unlikely that he invented it.

190


verses are not necessarily Jewish in origin. Walter has argued that a Jewish forger would hardly have chosen such an obscure legendary figure as Linus^^ and has suggested that some of these verses may be of Pythagorean origin. The fact that these verses are cited In support of the Sabbath is significant, since the Sabbath was one of the more peculiar Jewish institudons. Aristobulus attempts to show that even such a distinctive institution can be explained and understood in Hellenistic categories. To say that "Aristobulus thus safeguards the uniqueness of Jewish tradition"'^ misses the point. He safeguards the tradition by showing that it is not really unique, but a particular formulation of something that is also prized by Greeks: "not only the Hebrews but also the Greeks recognize the seventh day as sacred."''' It is also misleading to say that he subordinates Greek philosophical and poetical texts to the Pentateuch.'^ The subordination is an illusion, since the Torah is reinterpreted in the categories of the supposedly derivative Greek authors.

Poetic Forgeries Unrelated to these verses in Aristobulus is a series of verses attributed to Greek poets found in Pseudo-Justin and Clement.'^ The use of gnomologia was developed in the Hellenistic age by Greek writers, most notably Chrysippus (280-207 B.C.E.), who succeeded Cleanthes as head of the Stoa. The method of using proof texts from respected writers was inherited by the Jewish apologists. The spurious verses in Pseudo-Justin and Clement are attributed to Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides, Pythagoras, Diphilus, Menander, and Hesiod. Clement (Stromateis 5.113.1) attributes one of the Sophocles quotations to (Pseudo-) Hecataeus in his book on Abraham and the Egyptians. Consequently, Schiirer and others attributed all the poetic forgeries to Pseudo-Hecataeus.^'' This is unwarranted, in view of our lack of 15. Thirteen verses of a work. Peri physeds kosmou, attributed to Linus, have survived. It is conceded that the first Linus verse here is a Jewish forgery, though not necessarily by Aristobulus. See Walter, Der Thoraausleger Aristobulus, 158-65. The Linus verses are attributed to Callimachus by Clement. 16. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 156. 17. Aristobulus, Fragment 5d; Eusebius, Praep. Evang. 13.13.34-35; Holladay, Fragments, 3:187. 18. Dawson, Allegorical Readers, 81, followed by Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 156. 19. For the verses, see A. M. Denis, Fragmenta Pseudepigraphorum quae supersunt Graeca (PVTG 3; Leiden: Brill, 1970) 161-74; for discussion, see Walter, Der Thoraausleger Aristobulus, 172-84. 20. E. Schiirer, Geschichte des jiidischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi (4th ed.; Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1909) 3:454-55.


191

knowledge about Pseudo-Heeataeus.'^' It is not possible to specify the sources of these fragments, except to say that they are before Clement. There is nothing to indicate Christian authorship. The content of the verses is mainly concerned to denounce idolatry and affirm monotheism. In this they resemble the pseudo-Justinian recension of the Orphic verses and Sib. Or. 3:1-45. The fragments of Pseudo-Menander are largely taken up with ethical issues and resemble Pseudo-Phocylides. Pseudo-Diphilus discourses on the two ways and the question of justice after death. Pseudo-Sophocles, in one passage, describes a final conflagration in terms influenced by Stoicism. All of these focus attention on the aspects of Judaism with which Greek philosophers were sympathetic. The extent of the common ground may be illustrated by the epistles of Heraclitus. Since the work of Bernays, it has been common to assume that some of these epistles were Jewish forgeries (at least epistles 4 and 7). However, Attridge has shown that even the most "Jewish" motifs in these epistles can be paralleled in the popular, especially Cynic, philosophers.^^ It is to this popular philosophy that the Jewish forgers appealed. Their appeal did not rest on any claim to revelation or to a special covenant of Judaism with God, but to the ethical and theistic convictions themselves, which were found to a higher degree in Judaism.

Pseudo-Aristeas A second representative of philosophical Judaism from the second century B.C.E. is the Letter of Aristeas, which we have already encountered in Chapter 2 above. In considering the view of Judaism in the Letter of Aristeas, two factors are of major importance. First, the prime expression of Judaism is the Mosaic law. This is what Demetrius wants for the library, and this is the basis of the high priest's exposition. The sanctity of the law is emphasized in the passage explaining why it has not previously been known to the Greek world: when a historian or a tragic poet attempts to draw on it, they are smitten with afflictions (312-16). We may contrast here the bold claim of Aristobulus that Plato, Pythagoras, and others had in fact drawn on Moses. Pseudo-Aristeas's comment would seem to cast doubt on the validity of the enterprise of Jewish writers such as Ezekiel the Tragedian. The law is not to be paraphrased but is to be exactly translated and interpreted. This, of course, brings us to the second point. The law needs interpretation. Its sense is not 21. So also Goodman in the revised edition of Schiirer, Tfie History of tfie Jewisti People. 3.1:657. 22. H. W. Attridge, First-Century Cynicism in tiie Epistles of Heraclitus (HTS 29; Missoula, Mont.; Scholars Press, 1976) 3-39.

192


plain or obvious. Further, it needs to be complemented with the wisdom provided by a Greek education. Perhaps the most striking and fundamental assertion in the endre work is found in a statement of Aristeas in secdon 16: "God, the overseer and creator of all things, whom they worship, is He whom all men worship, and we too. Your Majesty, though we address Him differently, as Zeus and Dis; by these names men of old not unsuitably signified that He through whom all creatures receive life and come into being is the guide and lord of all." The claim is not only that the God of the Jews is the creator of all, but that the same deity has been recognized by Greeks under different names. That the passage is attributed to a Greek does not change the fact that it Is composed by a Jewish author and reflects the theology of the work as a whole.^^ We have seen an almost identical sendment expressed by the Jewish author Aristobulus in his own name: the inherent meaning of the names Dis and Zeus in the Greek poets refers to God.-^"* This statement in Pseudo-Aristeas is not contradicted by the later exposition of the high priest Eleazar, which condemns polytheism and idolatry. Pseudo-Aristeas was not suggesting the complete equivalence of Greek and Jewish religion by any means, only that the Greeks, too, had a place for the worship of a supreme god. While the law is important, and Pseudo-Aristeas is concerned with the observation of the detailed dietary laws, Judaism is not a covenantal nomism. In the words of Hadas: "The theology premised is applicable to all mankind, not to the Jews alone, and God's providence is universal. It is not suggested that God will show special consideration for the Jews simply by virtue of their being Jews, nor is there any hint of proselytization.... The Jews follow their own traditional usage to attain a religious end; the same end may be attained by others by a different path."^^ Not all paths followed by Gentiles are approved, and some, such as Egyptian theriolatry, are viewed with contempt, but Aristeas also affirms that Gentiles can arrive at the recognition of "the only God omnipotent over all creation." The understanding of the law is the subject of the high priest's discourse in 130-68. There are obvious affinities with Aristobulus. Nothing in the law has been set down heedlessly or in the spirit of myth {mythodos, 168), and the interpretation is based on the physike dianoia. Moses, the lawgiver, is presented as a philosopher proceeding from principles. The first principle is that God is one and that his power is made manifest throughout 23. Pace Barclay. Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 143, who claims that "the attribution of this statement to a Greek gives it less significance than if it were from a Jew." On the contrary, the status of Jewish religion is established in the work precisely by the recognition of authoritative Gentiles. 24. Aristobulus, Fragment 4; Praep. Evang. 13.12.7; Holladay, Fragments, 3:173. 25. M. Hadas, Aristeas to Philocrates (New York: Harper, 1951) 62.


193

creation. Thus, an evildoer cannot escape notice, and the commandments are effectively enforced. This is followed by an attack on idolatry and polytheism, from an explicitly euhemeristic point of view. It should be noted that nothing in this attack could offend an enlightened p a g a n . I t does, however, provide a reason why Moses "fenced us about with impregnable palisades and with walls of iron, to the end that we should mingle in no way with any of the other nations" (130). Idolatry was undeniably prevalent in the Gentile world, and the fabricators of myths, such as Homer, were commonly held to be the wisest of the Greeks (137).^^ Many Greek philosophers would have said as much. The "universalism" of the Hellenistic Jewish authors was never indiscriminate. It always involved a distinction between the higher ideals of Hellenism and popular paganism.^^ Eleazar is exceptional only insofar as he uses the critique of idolatry to justify the Jewish food laws and the barrier they created between Jew and Gentile. Yet it becomes apparent that, while Pseudo-Aristeas is prepared to defend the full law, he does not understand it in a nationalistic sense. What the Jews really refuse to mingle with are "vain opinions," not other nations as such. Enlightened pagans, such as the Egyptian priests, can appreciate the Jewish position,2^ The significant distinction is not between Jews and Gentiles, but between "men of God, a title applicable to none others but only to him who reveres the true God" and "men of food and drink and raiment" (140). So the particular, concrete commandments are reinterpreted allegorically to apply to universal human virtues. The birds forbidden by the dietary laws symbolize oppression and violence, animals that part the hoof symbolize discrimination, those that chew the cud symbolize memory, and so forth. The law, in short, is one symbolic expression of the truth which can also be approached in other ways.^^ 26. See the passages listed by Attridge, First-Century Cynicism. 27. M. A. L. Beavis, "Anti-Egyptian Polemic in the Letter of Aristeas 130-165 (The High Priest's Discourse)," 7S7 18 (1987) 145-51, goes too far in restricting the high priest's polemic to benighted peoples such as the Egyptians, but she is correct that it does not apply to "enlightened fellow-monotheists." These, however, were always a tiny minority among the Greeks. 28. Gruen misses this discrimination when he summarizes Eleazar's discourse as "so much for the Greeks" {Heritage and Hellenism, 216). Consequently, he is left with a paradoxical picture of an Eleazar who wants to be "free of Gentile taint" and simultaneously a model of Greek paideia. Contrast C. R. Holladay. "Jewish Responses to Hellenistic Culture in Early Ptolemaic Egypt," in P. Bilde et al., eds., Ethnicity in Hellenistic Egypt (Aarhus: Aarhus University Press, 1992), 147-48, who notes the pointed critique of pagan religion, but also notes that it "would have won the assent of sophisticated pagans, including Egyptian priests." 29. The positive appeal to "the leading priests among the Egyptians" (140) is remarkable in view of the contemptuous dismissal of "very foolish people, Egyptians and those like them" a few verses earlier. 30. N. Janowitz, "Translating Cult: The Letter of Aristeas and Hellenistic Judaism," Society of Biblical Literature Seminar Papers {1983) 347-57, argues that the purpose of such alle-

194


The universalism of Pseudo-Aristeas is further emphasized by the lengthy table-talk section. The answers of the sages, like the questions to which they respond, are rather banal and commonplace wisdom. Many scholars have argued that the section is adapted from a Hellenistic tract.^' The constant references to God are the only distinguishing f e a t u r e . T h e significant point is that the sages are expected to show a mastery of the common wisdom of the Hellenistic world. The Torah alone is not enough. The sages are expected to be proficient, not only in the literature of the Jews but also in that of the Greeks. They are distinguished in paideia (121). They "zealously cultivated the quality of the mean . . . and eschewing a crude and uncouth disposition they likewise avoided conceit and the assumption of superiority over others" (122). They did not, in short, regard themselves as a chosen people. The high priest himself is a model of kalokagathia or "a Greek gentieman" (3). The Torah, to be properly appreciated, must be complemented by Greek culture. One other aspect of the Judaism of the letter requires comment. The description of Judea and Jerusalem includes a striking passage on the high priest (96-99): We were struck with great astonishment when we beheld Eleazar at his ministration, and his apparel, and the visible glory conferred by his being garbed in the coat which he wears and the stones that adorn his person. . . . The total effect of the whole arouses awe and emotional excitement, so that one would think he had passed to some other sphere outside the world. I venture to affirm positively that any man who witnesses the spectacle I have recounted will experience amazement and astonishment indescribable, and his mind will be deeply moved at the sanctity attaching to every detail. gory is not to reconcile two cultures but to retrieve old texts that had lost their meaning. But the reason the old texts had lost their meaning was the impact of a new, Hellenistic, culture. 31. M. Hengel, "Anonymitat, Pseudepigraphie, und 'Literarische Falschung' in der judisch-hellenistischen Literatur," in K. von Fritz, ed., Pseudepigrapha I: Pseudopythagorica, Lettres de Platon, Littirature pseudepigraphique juive (Entretiens sur I'Antiquitfi Classique 18; Geneva: Vandoeuvres, 1972) 299; Hadas, Aristeas, 40-43; W. W. Tarn, The Greeks in Bactria and India (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1938) 414-36. On the Hellenistic kingship treatises, see E. R. Goodenough, "The Political Philosophy of Philo Judaeus," Yale Classical Studies J (1928) 53-102; and P Hadot, "Furstenspiegel," RACl (1970) 555-632. See further O. Murray, "Aristeas and Ptolemaic Kingship," JTS 18 (1967) 337-71; J. J. Lewis, "The Table-Talk Section in the Letter of Aristeas," NTS 13 (1966) 53-56; Tcherikover, "Ideology," 65. 32. Gruen's suggestion, that "the dragging of God into every response" shows the author's sense of humor, is singularly anachronistic (Heritage and Hellenism, 219). 33. See further G. Boccaccini, Middle Judaism: Jewish Thought, 300 BCE to 200 CE (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991) 161-85. His comment that the Jewish translators eat the same food as the Greeks at the final banquet must be qualified, since everything is prepared in accordance with the customs of the Jews (181).


I95

No mention is made of the efficacy of the sacrifices or their effect on the relations between human beings and God. The liturgy is considered a spectacle and is admired for its emotional effect on onlookers. This is not how the cult functions in the context of covenantal nomism. Rather, it is one specimen among others of the glory of Judaism — ranking with the description of the land and the order of the state. We are reminded of the praise of Simon the Just in Ben Sira, where, again, the glory of the priesthood is the issue. Pseudo-Aristeas goes beyond Ben Sira in suggesting that the cult is an ecstatic experience because of the emotional effect of the solemn rituals. The concern is not with the mechanism of atonement but with the public impression of Judaism that is conveyed.

T h e W i s d o m of S o l o m o n A third representative of philosophical Judaism is found in one of the major products of the Egyptian Diaspora, the Wisdom of Solomon. The Egyptian provenance of the work is not seriously in doubt in view of the prominence of Egypt in chapters 10-19, and the philosophical coloring of the work is most obviously compatible with an Alexandrian setting.^* The book has been dated anywhere from the second century B.C.E. to 40 C.E.^^ The strongest arguments have been adduced by Winston, who sets the book In the time of Caligula. The theory that idolatry arose from the desire of subjects to flatter a distant ruler (14:16-20) is most easily explained with reference to the early Roman period, and the term kratesis in 6:3 may have a technical reference to the Roman conquest of Egypt. The atmosphere of persecution in the opening chapters suggests more specifically the time of Caligula, but this should not be pressed, as these chapters reflect a philosophical and religious debate that does not require a context of actual persecution. The genre of the book is variously identified as logos protreptikos or exhortatory discourse, which was "a union of philosophy and rhetoric" developed originally by the S o p h i s t s , o r as an encomium.

34. For a contrary view, see D. Georgi, Weisheit Salomos (JSHRZ 3.4; Gutersloh: Mohn, 1980) 396. 35. For a summary, see J. Reider, The Book of Wisdom (Dropsie College Series; New York; Harper, 1957) 12-14. An early date (late second century B . C . E . ) has been defended by Georgi, Weisheil Salomos, 396. 36. D. Winston, The Book of Wisdom (AB 43; Garden City, N.Y: Doubleday, 1979) 2025. 37. Ibid., 18; J. M. Reese, Hellenistic Influence on the Book of Wisdom and Its Consequences (AnBib 41; Rome: Biblical Institute, 1970) 117-21. For a contrary view, see Georgi (Weisheh Salomos, 394), who emphasizes the book of Wisdom's affinities with Gnostic writings.

196


which is a genre of epideictic rhetoric, demonstradve rather than d i d a c t i c . I n fact, the different parts of the book have different characters. The hortatory aspect is dominant in the so-called "book of eschatology" (1:1-6:21); the "book of wisdom" (6:22-9:18) is an encomium, and the last part of the book, the "book of history," is epideictic, demonstrating the works of wisdom. The Wisdom of Solomon does not attempt to identify the god of the Jews with Zeus and so posit a common basis of religion for Jews and Gentiles. Indeed, the central focus of the book is not on the divinity as such but on the figure of wisdom. While the figure of wisdom had a well-known prehistory in the Jewish wisdom literature, its presentation here is distinctiy colored by Greek philosophy.''^ Wisdom is the principle of order which "stretches in might irom pole to pole and effectively orders all things" (8:1). It can be expressed in physical terms: "manifold, subde, agile, lucid, unsullied, clear, inviolable . . . more mobile than any motion, she pervades and permeates all things by reason of her pureness" (7:22-24). Wisdom is a spirit (pneuma) that loves humanity, which has "filled the inhabited earth" and "holds all things together." Much of this conception is evidentiy based on the Stoic Logos/Pneuma as the rational soul and principle of coherence in the universe, although various nuances are derived from Middle Platonism and from the aretalogies of Isis, in addition, of course, to the Jewish wisdom literature.*' The author evidentiy found common basis for Judaism and Greek philosophy in this figure, which carried less danger of polytheism than Zeus or Dis. The figure of wisdom has a pivotal role in determining the identity of the various parties in the book.*^ Wisdom "will not enter a fraudulent mind 38. M. Gilbert, "Wisdom Literature," in M. E. Stone, ed., Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period (CRINT 2.2; Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984) 307; P Bizzetti, // Libro della Sapienza (Brescia: Paideia, 1984) 157. 39. See further J. J. Collins, Jewish Wisdom in the Hellenistic Age (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1997) 182. On the division of the book, see A. G. Wright, "The Structure of the Book of Wisdom," Bib 48 (1967) 165-84; M. Kolarcik, The Ambiguity of Death in the Book of Wisdom 1-6 (AnBib 127; Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1991) 1-28. 40. Winston, The Book of Wisdom. 33-40; C. Larcher, Etudes sur le Livre de la Sagesse (Paris: Gabalda, 1969) 181-236; E. des Places, "Epithetes et attributs de la 'Sagesse' (Sg 7, 2223 et SVF 1 557 Arnim)," Bib 57 (1976) 414-19; H. Engel, "'Was Weisheit ist und wie sie entstand, will ich verkiinden': Weish 7,22-8,1 innerhalb des egkomiun tes sophias (6,22-11,1) als Starkung der Plausibilitat des Judentums angesichts hellenistischer Philosophic und Religiositat," in G. Hentschel and E. Zenger, eds., Lehrerin der Gerechtigkeit (Leipzig: Benno, 1991) 67-102; H, Htibner, "Die Sapientia Salomonis und die antike Philosophie," in idem, ed.. Die Weisheit Salomos in Horizont Biblischer Theologie (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1993) 55-81. 41. See the parallels adduced by Winston, The Book of Wisdom, 159-218, and the literature there cited. The philosophical context of the book is properiy recognized as Middle Platonism. See Collins, Jewish Wisdom, 200-202. 42. J. J. Collins, "Cosmos and Salvation: Jewish Wisdom and Apocalyptic in the Hellenistic Age," HR 17 (1977) 123-27, reprinted in J. J. Collins, Seers, Sibyls and Sages in Hellenistic-Roman Judaism (Leiden: Brill, 1997) 317-38.


197

nor make her home in a body mortgaged to sin" (1:4). By implieation, it will enter into a righteous soul and abide in a sinless body, or. In the formulation of 7:27, "generation by generation she enters into holy souls and renders them friends of God and prophets."*^ While 1:4 implies that the recipient of wisdom must already be righteous, 7:27 suggests that it is wisdom which makes them righteous. We should not regard these statements as opposed. The point is that the presence of wisdom is an identifying mark of the righteous. The presence or absence of wisdom determines the eschatological fate of the individual. In the famous sorites'^* of 6:17-20: The true beginning of wisdom is the desire to learn, and a concern for learning is love of her; love for her means the keeping of her laws, attention to the law is a surety of immortality, and immortality makes one near to God. The actual eschatological conceptions, which are developed mainly in the "book of eschatology" (chaps. 1-5), are heavily dependent on Jewish apocalyptic traditions (especially in the judgment scene in 5:5: "How was he reckoned among the sons of God and how is his portion among the holy ones?").*^ Yet, these notions are combined with a distinctly Greek conception of the immortality of the soul, with a suggestion of preexistence, and they avoid any reference to resurrection of the body,*^ The fate of both righteous and wicked is determined by their understanding of God and the world. The impious are those who "reasoned not rightly" (2:1) and "knew not the mysteries of God" (2:22). Consequently, they resolve to "let our strength be the rule of our righteousness, for weakness is proved to be unprofitable" (2:11). When judgment comes, they realize their mistake: "we erred from the

43. For parallels on the notion "friends of God," see Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 188-89. On the understanding of prophets in Egyptian Judaism, see H. A. Wolfson, Philo: Foundations of Religious Philosophy in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam (2 vols.; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1947) 2:3-72. 44. The sorites is imperfect, since it should conclude by joining the beginning and end: "the beginning of wisdom makes one near to God." See A. T. S. Goodrick, The Book of Wisdom (Oxford Church Bible Commentary; London: Rivingtons, 1913) 175. 45. See P. Grelot, "L'Eschatologie de la Sagesse et les Apocalypses Juives," in A la Rencontre de Dieu: Memorial Albert Gelin (Le Puy: Xavier Mappus, 1961) 165-78, L. Ruppert, Der leidende Gerechte (Forschung zur Bibel 5; Wiirzburg: Echter, 1972) 70-105; idem, "Gerechte und Frevler (Gottlose) in Sap 1,1-6,21: Zum Neuverstandnis und zur Aklualisierung alttestamentlicher Traditionen in der Sapientia Salomonis," in Hiibner, ed.. Die Weisheit Salomos, 1-54; G. W. E, Nickelsburg, Resurrection, Immortality, and Eternal Life in Intertestamental Judaism (HTS 26; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University, 1972) 58-62; M. Delcor, "LTmmortalite de I'ame dans le Livre de la Sagesse et dans les documents de Qumran." NRTh 11 (1955) 614-30; Collins, Jewish Wisdom, 183-85. 46. Collins, Jewish Wisdom, 185-87; Winston, The Book of Wisdom, 25-32.

198


path of truth . . . and we did not know the way of the Lord" (5:6-7). By contrast, the righteous individual "professes to have knowledge of God" and "declares the end of the righteous blessed" (2:13, 16). Consequently, such people are not seduced by the short-term gains of wickedness, for their hope is full of immortality (3:4). Those who understand and appreciate the role of righteousness In the world order can benefit from its fruits: "the righteous live forever" (5:15). Even the cosmos joins in the rejection of the wicked, since God "will make all creation his weapons for the repulse of his foes" (5:17). The wisdom of the righteous is fully grounded in an understanding of the universe. It involves "unerring knowledge of existent being, to know the structure of the universe and the operation of the elements; the beginning, and end, and middle of times" (7:17-18). The major illustration of the workings of wisdom is provided by the socalled "book of history" in chapters 10-19. These chapters consist of a brief review of the history recorded in the book of Genesis (chap. 10) and a lengthy reflection on the Exodus (chaps. 11-19).*^ The material is not treated as a recitation of "salvation history" as the unique and exceptional history of Israel. In chapter 10, the events in question are not ascribed to the direct intervention of God but to the constant activity of wisdom in the world. Subsequently, wisdom fades from the scene and the author speaks more directly of God, probably because he is adapting traditional material. Nonetheless, the experience of Israel and its enemies is expressed as an experience of the cosmos rather than a direct encounter with God.*^ Idolaters are punished "by means of those very creatures whom they esteemed as gods" (12:27). The plagues of Egypt and the crossing of the sea reveal that "nature fights for the righteous" (15:17) and that "creation, ministering to thee its maker, strains itself against the unrighteous for punishment and slackens for beneficence on behalf of those that trust in you [God]" (16:24). Even when "the whole creation in its particular nature was fashioned again anew complying with your commands so that your servants might be kept unharmed," this miraculous transformation does not require a direct intervention of God. Instead, it is brought about by an inner mutation of the universe, prompted only by God's command: "the elements, being changed in order among themselves, as in a psaltery the notes vary the character of the tune, yet always adhering to the sound." In the words of A. T. S. Goodrick: "Even miracles are regarded by 'Wisdom' not as a derangement of the universe, but as a rearrangement of the

47. See R Enns, Exodus Retold (HSM 57; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997); S, Cheon, The Exodus Story in the Wisdom of Solomoti: A Study in Biblical Interpretation (JSPSup 23; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997). 48. P. Beauchamp, "Le salut corporel des justes et la conclusion du livre de la Sagesse," Bib 45 (1964) 491-526; G. Ziener, Die theologische Begriffsprache im Buche der Weisheit (BBB II; Bonn: Hanstein, 1956) 135-36.


199

harmony of it."*^ The understanding of history is grounded in a consistent understanding of the workings of the cosmos. The hand of God can, of course, be discerned in the workings of the cosmos. It is precisely from the greatness and beauty of creation that the creator is recognized {13:1). Wisdom involves the recognition of God through the works of creation, since this is required for a full understanding of the world. It is the wisdom which recognizes God that leads to righteousness and immortality: "For to know thee is perfect righteousness and to know thy might is the root of immortality." Yet this knowledge is indirect, mediated by wisdom, through the cosmos. It is not given directly by the prophetic "word of the LORD" or by ecstatic revelation. The Wisdom of Solomon has often been said to be law-oriented in its p i e t y . T h e righteous man reproaches the wicked with sins against the law (2:12),^' and the kings of the earth are condemned because they have not kept the law (6:4). While the "law" In question may be presumed to correspond substantially with the Mosaic law, the two cannot be simply identified. As in the other Jewish Hellenistic literature, those elements of the law which are peculiarly Jewish are ignored, and emphasis is placed on elements in accordance with natural law. The list of sins in 14:22-29 covers the ethical interests of the book rather completely: "All is confusion — bloody murder, deceitful theft, corruption, treachery, tumult, perjury, agitation of decent men, ingratitude, soul defilement, interchange of sex roles, irregular marriages, adultery and debauchery. For the worship of the unspeakable idols is the beginning, cause, and end of every evil." The basic sin is idolatry, which is denounced repeatedly throughout the book.^^ This is said to lead to a variety of other sins. Of these, adultery is most frequendy mentioned.Surprisingly, homosexuality is not prominent (a reference to interchange of sex roles in 14:26 is the closest allusion). Infanticide is naturally enough singled out in the account of the oppression of the Hebrews in Egypt (18:5). There is also a reference to "secret mysteries or frenzied revels connected with strange laws" (14:23), which were also frowned on by classical authors on occasion.Otherwise, the wrongdoing of the wicked is of the type suggested in

49. Goodrick, The Book of Wisdom. 251. See further J, P M. Sweet, "The Theory of Miracles in the Wisdom of Solomon," in C. F. D. Moule, ed.. Miracles (London: Mowbray, 1965) 115-26. 50. So U. Breitenstein, Beobachtungen zu Sprache Stil und Gedankengut des vierlen Makkabderbuchs (Basel and Stuttgart: Schwabe, 1978) 19. 51. The identity of the wicked is much disputed, but they are probably renegade Jews. See Collins, Jewish Wisdom, 193-95. 52. Especially chaps. 13-15. For an extended treatment, see M. Gilbert, La Critique des Dieux dans le livre de la Sagesse (AnBib 53; Rome: Biblical Institute, 1973). 53. Cf, the comments on the children of adulterers in 3:16 and 4:3. 54. Winston ( The Book of Wisdom 238) aptly cites Livy, History of Rome 39.8-19.

200


2:10: "Let us tyrannize the poor honest man, let us not spare the widow nor reverence the elder's hair long grey." Such actions were anathema in any culture. It is significant that, when the righteous is said to reproach the wicked with sins against the law, the parallel verse reads, "and charges us with falseness to our training" (2:12). Similarly in 6:4, not keeping the law is paralleled by the more general charges of not judging rightly and not walking according to the will of God. There is no reference in the book to such specific Jewish laws as circumcision, Sabbath observance, or the dietary laws. There is one reference to sacrifice in the story of the Exodus (18:9), but sacrifice was not, in any case, distincdve. The law menUoned in the Wisdom of Solomon might in practice be equated with the natural law known to all.^^ The thought of the Wisdom of Solomon on this subject is most vividly illustrated in 13:1-9. On the subject of the basic sin of idolatry, we read that all people should know God from his works: "For from the greatness and beauty of created things is their author correspondingly perceived." The argument is similar to that of Paul in Romans 1 .^^ Despite his sympathy for the weakness of human nature, the author concludes that idolaters are, after all, culpable, not because they failed to follow the law of Moses but because they did not apply their resourcefulness to the knowledge of God. He offers a lengthy and varied critique of idolatry. The polemic against wooden images in 13:10-19 draws its inspiration from Isa. 44:9-20. In 14:12-31, however, we find a euhemeristic explanation of I d o l s . S o m e idols were images of dead loved ones, now honored as gods. Others were images of absent rulers, honored in lieu of the actual monarchs. Animal worship is singled out for special contempt (15:18-19). This critique of idolatry has been described as "one of the most sustained attacks on Gentile religiosity that we have from the pen of a Diaspora Jew" and has been taken as evidence that the predominant theme in the Wisdom of Solomon is "the social conflict and cultural antagonism between Jews and non-Jews."^^ But this conclusion overlooks the fact that much of this polemic can be paralleled in the writings of Stoic and Cynic philosophers. Many Greeks could be expected to share the contempt for Egyptian 55. The identity of the Law of Moses with the Law of Nature is impHcit in Sirach 24 and explicit in Philo, De Opificio Mitndi 1 §3 and Josephus, Antiquities Proem 1.4 §24. On the idea of natural law in antiquity, see H. Koester, "Nomos Physeos: The Concept of Natural Law in Greek Thought," in J. Neusner, ed.. Religions in Antiquity: Essays in Memory of E. R. Goodenough (Leiden: Brill, 1968) 521-41; and R. A. Horsley, "The Law of Nature in Philo and Cicero," HTR 71 (1978) 35-39. 56. J. J. Collins, "Natural Theology and Biblical Tradition: The Case of Hellenistic Judaism," CBQ 60 (1998) 1-15. 57. Euhemerus of Messene, who wrote about 300 B . C . E . , claimed that Cronos and Zeus were great kings of the past who were worshipped as gods by grateful people. 58. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 186, 184.


201

animal worship and other erass forms of superstition.^^ Philo, the primary example of "cultural convergence" in Hellenistic Judaism, has a very similar polemic against idolatry in his treatise on the Decalogue.^'' The similarities suggest that much of this polemic was traditional in the synagogues of Alexandria. Both in the book of Wisdom and In Philo the polemic must be seen in the context of attempted rapprochement between Greek and Jewish wisdom. This rapprochement was never uncritical. Some elements of pagan religiosity were profoundly offensive even to the most Hellenized Jews. But these elements were also offensive to enlightened Greek philosophers. They did not require "cultural antagonism" toward the entire Gentile world. In the review of Israel's history, no individual names are used. Each of the biblical characters illustrates a type, the "righteous" — in 10:4, Noah; in 10:5, Abraham; in 10:6, Lot; in 10:10, Jacob; and so forth.^' The history of Israel provides a paradigmatic example of the experience of righteous individuals or a righteous people, but it is only an illustration of the workings of the universe. In practice, the author appears to equate the righteous with historical Israel and the unrighteous with Israel's enemies. While Israel is never mentioned by name, it is clearly referred to as "a holy people and blameless race" (10:15), "your people" (12:19; 16:2, 3, 5; etc.), "your children" (16:10, 21, 26; 18:24), "the holy nation" (16:2), "your holy ones" (18:2), "the holy children" (18:9), and even "the son of God" (18:13). The last characterization is derived from Exod. 4:22-23, but it associates the whole people of Israel with the righteous man, who claims that God is his father (2:13-20). In 18:6 the Israelites of the Exodus are called "our ancestors." In view of the clear identification of Israel in these chapters, some commentators speak of "undisguised particularism" and find that God is "partial to the Jews and inimical to their enemies."^^ There is, in fact, a fundamental tension between universalism and particularism in the Wisdom of Solomon.^^ On the one hand, God "does not delight in the destruction of the living, for he created all things that they might have being" (1:13-14) and has compassion over all, "because you can do all, 59. M. GOrg, "Die Religionslcritiit in Weish 13,If.: Beobachtungen zur Entstehung der Sapientia-Salomonis im spathellenistischen Alexandria," in G. Hentscliel and E. Zenger, eds., Lehrerin der Gerechtigkeit (Leipzig; Benno, 1991) 13-25, argues that the polemic is mainly directed against Egyptian religion. 60. Philo, De Decalogo 52-81; De Vita Conlemplativa 3-9; De Specialibus Legibus 1.13-29; 2.255; Larcher, Etudes, 162-66. 61. B. L. Mack, "Imitatio Mosis: Patterns of Cosmology and Soteriology in the Hellenistic Synagogue," Studia Philonica 1 (1972) 30-31. This usage cannot be adequately understood as "riddling speech" such as we find in the Alexandra of Lycophron (Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon, 139). The sty]t of the Alexandra is pseudo-prophetic, like that of the Sibylline Oracles. The Wisdom of Solomon is explicitly referring to past events. 62. Reider, The Book of Wisdom, 41. 63. Collins, "Natural Theology and Biblical Tradition," 11-14.

202


and you overlook the sins of men with a view to their repentance, for you love all that exists and loathe nothing which you have created, for if you had hated anything you would never have fashioned it" (11:23-24). The high priest can intercede for all humanity, "for on his long robe the whole world was depicted" (18:24).^* While Israel is presented as the paradigm of the righteous, it is not necessarily an exclusive paradigm. Wisdom is characterized as philanthropon (1:6; 7:23), a Stoic term with broad universalist implications. On the other hand, we are told that God hated "those who lived long ago in your holy land" because of their abominable practices (12:3-4), and the author has nothing good to say about the ancient Canaanites and Egyptians. The author wanted to affirm simultaneously a universalist doctrine of divine philanthropia and the bibhcal tradition of the election of Israel. The two ideas are not easily compatible.^^ The strain was no doubt magnified because of the social tensions in Alexandria in the early Roman p e r i o d . T h e Egyptians, we are told, "practiced a more bitter hatred of strangers" and "made slaves of guests who were their benefactors" (19:13-14). It is not difficult to hear in these lines echoes of the conflicts in Alexandria in the first century C.E. Despite the polemical cast of chapters 11-19, the dominant tone of the Wisdom of Solomon is one of convergence with Greek culture, typified by the portrayal of wisdom in Greek philosophical terms in the middle section of the book. The spirit of philanthropia came under strain in the Roman period because of the "bitter hatred of strangers" on the part of the Alexandrian Greeks. The ancient story of the Exodus, with its unabashed ethnic particularism, spoke to this situation more effectively than the doctrine of wisdom as a universal spirit. Yet the author still tries to see this story as a manifestation of the working of wisdom and of cosmic principles, and he still affirms that the knowledge of God is possible for Gentiles, even if they seldom attain it. Like Philo, he still believes in the ultimate compatibility of Jewish revelation and Greek philosophy. The polemic against idolatry and the critique of pagan religion must be seen in that context.

Fourth Maccabees As a final example of philosophical Judaism apart from Philo, we now turn to 4 Maccabees, which is presented as a philosophdtaton logon. Most schol64. Compare Philo, De Specialibus Legibus 1.66-97, where the truest temple of God is the whole universe. 65. For a similar tension in the thought of Philo see A. Mendelson, Philo's Jewish Identity (BJS 161; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1988) 115-38. 66. Winston, The Book of Wisdom, 45.


203

ars have dated the work in the mid-first century C.E., but recently Breitenstein has revived the view of Dupont-Sommer that it was written in the early second century C.E.^^ The same data have been adduced in support of the different positions. Bickerman, followed by Hadas, claimed that "every unprejudiced reader of IV Maccabees cannot but be impressed by the fact that the Temple and its service are regarded as existent in the book,"^^ but the passages he mentions (4:20; 14:9) do not bear out the claim. On the other hand, Breitenstein notes that 4 Maccabees avoids reference to sacrifice and the cult in cases where they are mentioned in 2 Maccabees, and he concludes that the book was written after the fall of the temple.^^ This argument is equally inconclusive. The work of Jason of Cyrene was exceptional in its interest in the temple. Lack of interest in sacrifice is not surprising in a work written in the Diaspora. On the other hand, the interest of Sib. Or. 5 in the temple is not diminished several decades after 70 C.E. In short, the attitude of 4 Maccabees to the temple and its cult is not a reliable guide to its date. Linguistic considerations are a little more helpful. Bickerman argued that the term nomikos (4 Mace. 5:4) in place of grammateus (2 Mace. 6:18) pointed to the Christian era, as also the term threskeia for "religion."^" Breitenstein has underlined the degree to which the vocabulary of 4 Maccabees differs from that of the Septuagint and is paralleled in later Christian writings. This consideration does not establish a precise date, but it favors the late first or early second century over an earlier period.^' The decisive consideration for Bickerman (and Hadas) lies in the title given to Apollonius in 4 Mace. 4:9, where he is strategos of Syria, Phoenicia, and Cilicia. In 2 Mace. 3:5 he is called strategos of Coele-Syria and Phoenicia. Cilicia was associated with Syria for administrative purposes only for a short period between 20 and 54 C.E. (approximately). Bickerman concludes that 4 Maccabees was written in this p e r i o d . I t now appears, however, that this union was only dissolved around 72 C.E.,^^ and in any case this datum 67. Breitenstein, Beobaciitungen, 1:75; A. Duponl-Soinmer, Le quatrieme livre des Machabees: Introduction, Traduction et Notes (Paris: Champion, 1939). 68. E. J. Bickerman, "The Date of Fourth Maccabees," in Studies in Jewish and Christian History, 1:277; M. Hadas, The Third and Fourth Books of Maccabees (Dropsie College Series; New York: Harper, 1953) 95. 69. Breitenstein, Beobachtungen, 171-74. That 4 Maccabees is dependent on 2 Maccabees seems clear enough (ibid., 19), despite the hesitation of U. Fischer, Eschatologie und Jenseitserwarlung im Hellenistischen Diasporajudentum (BZNW 44; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1978) 87. 70. Bickerman, "The Date of Fourth Maccabees," 276-77. 71. Breitenstein, Beobachtungen, 13-29. See also J. W. van Henten, The Maccabean Martyrs as Saviors of the Jewish People: A Study of 2 and 4 Maccabees (Leiden: Brill, 1997) 77-78. 72. Bickerman, "The Date of Fourth Maccabees," 279-80. 73. So van Henten, The Maccabean Martyrs, 74. See also idem, "Datierung und Herkunft des Vierten Makkabaerbuches," in J. W. van Henten, H. J. de Jonge, P. T. van Rooden,

204


only gives the terminus post quern; an author may have alluded to that administrative arrangement when it was no longer in existence.'''* Bickerman sdll commands a considerable foUowing,^^ but the balance of opinion has generally shifted to a date in the late first or early second century C.E.^^ There is general agreement that the book was composed in the Diaspora, but it gives no clear indicadon of the particular place. Freudenthal had already raised objections against Alexandria,^^ and, indeed, the perspective of 4 Maccabees is very different from that of any of the Egyptian Jewish works we have considered. Hadas has argued at some length for Andoch as the place of origin, mainly because of the immediate presence of Andochus at the t o r t u r e s . T h i s , however, may be only a dramatic technique, without regard for geographical probability. It is true that church tradition localized the graves of the martyrs at Andoch.''^ This consideration certainly does not prove that all variants of the legend were developed in Antioch, but it provides some reason for suggesting Antioch as the place of origin.^*' The evidence for this tradidon, however, is no older than the fourth century C.E.^' Eduard Norden argued for a city in Asia Minor, on the basis of the book's style and philosophical affinities.There is no conclusive evidence, but either Syria or Asia Minor seems more probable than Alexandria or Palestine. 4 Maccabees is an example of epideictic r h e t o r i c . I t begins with an and J. W. Wesselius, eds., Tradition and Re-interpretation in Jewish and Early Christian Literature: Essays in Honour of JUrgen C. H. Lebratn (Leiden: Brill, 1986) 136-49. 74. H. J. Klauck, 4 Makkabderbuch (JSHRZ 3.6; Gutersloh: Mohn, 1989) 668. 75. Goodman, in Schiirer, The History of the Jewish People, 3.1:591; H. Anderson, "4 Maccabees," in OTP, 2:534; S. K. Stowers, "4 Maccabees," in J. L. Mays, ed., Harper's Bible Commentary (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1988) 923. 76. Klauck, 4 Makkabderbuch, 669, suggests a date between 90 and 100 C . E . Van Henten, The Maccabean Martyrs, 78, opts for a date around 100 C . E . , but allows that the last decades of the first century and the early decades of the second cannot be excluded. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 449, follows van Henten without the qualification. 77. J. Freudenthal, Die Flavius Josephus beigelegte Schrift iiber die Herrschaft der Vernunft (IV Makkabderbuch) (Breslau: Skutsch, 1869) 112. 78. Hadas, The Third attd Fourth Books, 109-13. 79. See U. Kellermann, Auferstanden in den Himmel, 2 Makkabder 7 und die Auferstehung der Mdrtyrer (SBS 95; Stuttgart: KathoHsches Bibelwerk, 1979) 17, and the literature there cited, especially Cardinal Rampolla, "Manyre et sepulture des Machabees," RAC 48 (1899) 290-305, 377-92, 457-65. 80. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 379-80, suggests that the apostasy of the Jew Antiochus during the first Jewish revolt, and his attempt to make others renounce their Judaism (Josephus, Jewish War 7.50-53) may have revived memories of Maccabean times. This suggestion is ingenious but not compelling. Klauck, 4 Makkabderbuch, 667, and Anderson, "4 Maccabees," 535, also opt for Antioch as the place of composition. 81. Van Henten, The Maccabean Martyrs, 79. 82. E. Norden, Die antike Kunstprosa vom VL Jahrhundert v. Chr. bis in die Zeit der Renaissaissance (1898; reprint, Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1974) 419. So also van Henten, The Maccabean Martyrs, 80-81. 83. Klauck, 4 Makkabderbuch, 659; van Henten, The Maccabean Martyrs, 63.


205

exordium (1:1-12), sets forth a thesis (1:13-3:18), and illustrates it with examples from the stories of the martyrs.^* Lebram argued that the latter part of the book has the form of an Epitaphios Logos or commemorative speech, a genre developed in classical A t h e n s . T h e r e are indeed notable correspondences. 4 Maccabees can be taken as praise of people who have died heroic deaths. 4 Maccabees 17:8 refers to an epitaph. But the classical orations have no parallels for the gruesome accounts of the deaths of the martyrs or for the speeches attributed to them.^^ There has been widespread debate as to whether this speech was actually delivered on the occasion of a commemoration or was a fictive discourse which was meant to be read, like the speeches of Isocrates.^'' Decisive criteria are hard to find. Hadas has noted a number of features suggestive of oral delivery (e.g., "at this season" In 1:10 and 3:19),^^ but these could easily have been imitated by an author. It seems better to regard 4 Maccabees as the exposition of a philosophical theme, and to regard the correspondences with funeral orations as incidental. It is unlikely that the book was composed for synagogue preaching, since it is not based on a biblical text.^^ There has also been considerable discussion on the philosophical affiliation of 4 Maccabees. Heinemann thought it was S t o i c , a position recendy modified by Renehan, who finds in it "Koine" philosophy with Stoic features.^' Hadas emphasized its debt to Plato.Breitenstein has quite correctly insisted that 4 Maccabees cannot be assigned to any philosophical school. The author was not a philosopher but a rhetorician who used philosophical ideas eclectically to embellish his case. The philosophical pronouncements are not consistently thought through. The story of the martyrs is not well integrated with its philosophical framework. "Reason" is virtually equated with keeping the law. Yet, Breitenstein's judgment that the author's "philoso84. Klauck, 4 Makkabaerbuch. 651-53. 85. J. H. C. Lebram, "Die literarische Form des vierten Makkabaerbuches," VC 28 (1974) 81-96. 86. Klauck. 4 Makkabderbuch, 661. The speeches suggest analogies with Hellenistic historiography. 87. For a review of the debate, see H. Thyen, Der Stil der jiidisch-hellenistischen Homilie (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1955) 12-14. Hadas, The Third and Fourth Books of Maccabees, 104-5, argued that it was a real address, delivered at the supposed burial site. 88. Hadas, The Third and Fourth Books, 102. 89. The synagogue setting was proposed by Freudenthal but has been rejected by all recent authors. 90.1. Heinemann, Posidonios'Metaphysische Schriften (Breslau: Marcus, 1921) 1:15459; idem, "Makkabaerbucher, Buch IV," PWRE 14/1 (1928) 800-805. 91. R. Renehan, "The Greek Philosophic Background of Fourth Maccabees," Rheinisches Museum fiir Philologie 115 (1972) 223-38. Stowers, "4 Maccabees," regards 4 Maccabees as very close to the middle Stoicism of Posidonius. 92. Hadas, The Third and Fourth Books, 116. 93. Breitenstein, Beobachtungen. 132-33. Klauck, 4 Makkabderbuch, 665-66.

206


phy" shows him not only to lack originality but to be a recht verstdndnislosen Kopp'^ seems too severe. While 4 Maccabees is scarcely convincing as a philosophical argument that reason is master of the emotions, it provides an unusual and interesdng specimen of Jewish apologetic rhetoric. As Breitenstein and others have observed, "reason" in 4 Maccabees is virtually equated with obedience to the law. Specifically: "Reason, then, is the intellect choosing with correct judgment the life of wisdom, and wisdom is knowledge of things human and divine and of their cause. Such wisdom is education in the law" (1:15-17). The reasonableness of the law is simply asserted. Furthermore, the law in question is not the broadly acceptable natural law of Pseudo-Phocylides or the Wisdom of Solomon, but the Jewish law in all its particularity: "How is it that when we are drawn to forbidden foods we turn away from the pleasures they afford? . . . When we crave sea food or fowl or quadrupeds or any sort of food which is forbidden to us according to the law, it is due to the mastery of reason that we abstain" (1:33-34). There is no attempt here to allegorize the dietary laws, as in Pseudo-Aristeas, in an effort to make them appear more reasonable. It is sufficient that they are commanded.^^ Further, in the story of the persecution and martyrdoms, the issue is precisely fideUty to the law, specifically in the matters of circumcision and food laws (4:25-26). What the stories show is that it is possible to be faithful to the full law, even in the face of the most extreme tortures. The reasonableness of such conduct is suggested by 4 Maccabees in two ways. First, there is the doctrine of retribution.^^ The martyrs can look forward to "the life of eternal blessedness" (17:18; cf. 15:3), "ranged in the choir of their fathers; having received souls pure and deathless from God" (18:23). By contrast, Antiochus "will endure at the hand of divine justice the punishment of eternal torment by fire" (9:9). There is no reference in 4 Maccabees to bodily resurrection (in contrast to its prototype in 2 Maccabees). There is an apparent exception to this in the mother's last speech in 18:6-19, where she cites Ezekiel 37, "Shall these dry bones live?"; this speech, though, has the appearance of an addition, after the conclusion of the narrative and the departure of Antiochus in 18:5.^'' While the exact nature of

94. Breitenstein, Beobachtungen. 179. 95. P L. Redditt, "The Concept of Nomos in Fourth Maccabees," CBQ 45 (1983) 24970: "While the author's arguments followed Greek patterns at times and employed widely known Greek (especially Stoic) terms, on the point of nomos the author argued consistently in a Jewish fashion, holding to his Jewish understanding of nomos and the demands for a lifestyle compatible with the nomos" (262). 96. Fischer, Eschatologie und Jenseitserwartung. 85-105, rightly notes that the references to afterlife are in the service of retribution. 97. See Klauck, 4 Makkabderbuch, 657-58. Van Henten, The Maccabean Martyrs. 184, accepts the authenticity of this passage and concludes that the author has combined different views of the afterlife.


207

the afterlife is not discussed in the main body of the work, it is certainly compatible with the immortality of the soul. 4 Maccabees does not exploit the support of Greek philosophy (especially Plato) on this point. Naturally, in Greek philosophy retribution after death was not related to the Jewish law, but the philosophical pedigree of the idea lent credibility to the argument of 4 Maccabees. The hope for the afterlife does not dominate 4 Maccabees. In this it contrasts sharply with 2 Maccabees 7, where the martyrs are repeatedly sustained by the hope of resurrection. In 4 Maccabees the main motivating factor is the inherent nobility of virtue. So the second brother taunts the king: "Do you not perceive, tyrant most cruel of all, that you are being tormented more than I, when you see that your arrogant reasoning of tyranny is vanquished by our endurance in the cause of religion? In my case I lighten my pain by the joys which virtue brings" (9:30). The virtue in question is primarily mastery of the passions and emotions. It is attained by "religious reason" (eusebes logismos) and by religious fidelity: "Those who take thought for religion with their whole heart, they alone are able to dominate the passions of the flesh" (7:18). The author assumes throughout that such self-control is a good in itself. This idea had ample precedent in Greek philosophy, from Plato's famous image of the charioteer and his two horses in the Phaedrus to the more severe attitudes of the S t o i c s . I n 4 Maccabees this virtue is an example for others (7:9; 5:33-36; 6:18-21; 16:16). It enables the brothers to overcome the tyrant by their endurance and to effect the purification of the fatherland (1:11). Yet, the appreciation of virtue is not dependent on these secondary effects but is a good in itself. The second way, then, in which 4 Maccabees contrives to make the conduct of the martyrs appear reasonable and praiseworthy is by using it as an example of the control of the passions, which was widely recognized as a virtue. Strict fidelity to the law can be presented as a virtue by Greek standards. The line of argument depends on the tacit assumption that conformity with the Jewish law is indeed in accordance with reason. 4 Maccabees does not attempt to establish this point. The weight of the argument is devoted to showing how conformity with the law involves mastery over the passions. Both reason and the law require mastery over the emotions. This does not warrant a logical identification of reason and obedience to the law, but It Is sufficient basis for a rhetorical identification which builds an association in the mind of the listener or reader. This kind of identification may not have 98. See A. H. Armstrong, An Introduction to Ancient Pfiilosopfiy (3d ed.; London; Methuen, 1957) 42-43, 54-55 (on Plato); 126 (on the Stoics). For the Stoics, see also the texts assembled in C. J. de Vogel, Greeli Philosophy III: The Hellenistic-Roman Period (Leiden: Brill, 1959) 168-76, and A. A. Long and D. N. Sedley, The Hellenistic Philosophers (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987) 1:410-23.

208


persuaded many Gentiles, but it assured the Hellenized Jews that strict Torah piety was compatible with advanced Hellenization. The attempt to assure the Jewish audience that such fidelity is the very best way to impress the Gentiles is reflected in the blatant fiction whereby Antiochus is said to have set up the martyrs as models for his troops (17:17-24). In addition to the claim to philosophical virtue, 4 Maccabees could also effect a rapprochement with Hellenistic culture through the use of the agon motif. The device of presenting the pursuit of virtue as a struggle or contest was well known in Greek popular philosophy. It was widely exploited by Philo'^'' and plays a prominent part in the Testament of Job. It was also utilized to great effect by Paul. The agon of 4 Maccabees is clearly stated in 17:11-14: "Divine indeed was the contest of which they were the issue. Of that contest virtue was the umpire, and its score was for constancy. Victory was incorruptibility in a life of long duration. . . . The tyrant was the adversary and humanity were the spectators" (17:11-14).'^' The use of this popular device of the philosophers enabled 4 Maccabees to be thoroughly Hellenistic even while defending the law in an uncompromising manner. The apologetic peculiarity of 4 Maccabees lies in its combination of a rigid, uncompromising obedience to the law, in all its details, with a thorough command of Greek language and rhetoric and a veneer of philosophical terminology. The entire situation represented is one of conflict. The martyrs are "responsible for the downfall of the tyranny which beset our nation, overcoming the tyrant by their fortitude so that through them their own land was purified" (1:11). But while this situation might suggest an antithesis of Judaism and the Hellenistic world, heroic death on behalf of the nation was a thoroughly Hellenistic virtue and widely admired in Greek and Latin literature."^^ Moreover, Judaism is presented here as a philosophy, a category in which it was often placed by sympathetic G r e e k s . W h i l e its philosophy is eclectic and confused, by Greek standards, it has its own coherence, if its assumption of the foundational character of the Jewish law be granted. The law is extolled by reference to virtues, especially eusebeia, or "piety." The virtues are understood within the frame of reference provided by the law, but the emphasis on virtues is typically Hellenistic. The author, in fact, seems to be thoroughly imbued with a Hellenistic consciousness but allows no com99. See V. C. PCitzner, Paul and the Agon Motif (Uidcn: BriW, 1967) 23-37, for the motif in Greek philosophy. 100. Ibid., 38-48. 101. The metaphor of the athletic contest is also used in 6:10 and 17:12-16. Pfitzner, Paul, 57-64. 102. Van Henten, The Maccabean Martyrs, 187-269 ("Dying for the Jewish People"); S. K. Williams, Jesus' Death as a Saving Event (Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1975) 16597. 103. Van Henten, The Maccabean Martyrs, 270-94.


209

promise in the literal observance of the Jewish law. Such an altitude cannot be classified simplistically as "cultural convergence" or "cultural antagonism." It represents both cultural convergence and religious separatism, and it attempts to justify distinctive Jewish positions in Hellenistic categories. Virtually every author we have considered has attempted to strike some such balance. In 4 Maccabees, the religious separatism is more pronounced than usual. It is exceptional in the clarity of the conflict it portrays and insofar as it does not resort to allegory but asserts the virtue of literal observance. The antagonistic situation may be taken as indicative of the situation of Diaspora Judaism at the end of the first century c.E. There is no retreat, however, from Greek culture insofar as it does not impinge on Jewish observance.

CHAPTER 6

The Mysteries of God

We have seen how some strands of Hellenistic Judaism attempted to relate the Jewish law to the surrounding culture by highlighting shared values and playing down the most distinctive elements, and others by seeking a common ground in Greek philosophy. A third strand went beyond these in appealing to a higher revelation of a transcendent world. This third category is not sharply distinct from the other two. Rather, it seeks a deeper foundation for the common ethic and the philosophy, and it overlaps with both.

Mystic J u d a i s m Mention of a higher revelation inevitably recalls the theory of a mystic Judaism propounded by E. R. Goodenough.' Goodenough's thesis was based on Philo and also on Jewish art from a slightly later period. The discussion of mystic Judaism has been complicated by the notorious evasiveness of "mysticism" and related terms.-^ Etymologically, these terms are derived 1. E. R. Goodenough, By Light, Light: The Mystic Gospel of Hellenistic Judaism (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1935); idem, Jewish Symbols in the Greco-Roman Period (12 vols,; New York: Random House, 1953-68). For the critical reception of Goodenough's work, see the incisive review article by Morton Smith, "Goodenough's Jewish Symbols in Retrospect," JBL 86 (1967) 53-68; also A. D. Nock, "The Question of Jewish Mysteries," in idem. Essays on Religion and the Ancient World (ed. Z. Stewart; 2 vols.; Oxford; Clarendon, 1972) 1:459-68; G. Lease, "Jewish Mystery Cults since Goodenough," ANRW II.20.2 (1987) 858-80, 2, See F. C. Happold, Mysticism: A Study and an Anthology (Baltimore: Penguin, 1963) esp. 35-39; S. Spencer, Mysticism in World Religion (Baltimore: Penguin, 1963), reviews the major historical manifestations of mysticism and concludes with "A Survey of Tendencies" but no definition. See also Margaret Smith, "The Nature and Meaning of Mysticism," in R, Woods,

210

THE MYSTERIES OF GOD

211

from the Greek mysteries, and a mystis is one who had been initiated. As the word is used in relation to Hellenistic Judaism, several different factors are involved.

A Mystic Ritual? The mysteries usually involve rituals, which in some way symbolize the process of salvation.^ Whether mysdc rituals were practiced in the Jewish Diaspora is doubtful. Goodenough argued that "the evidence seems on the whole to suggest that they may have had their mystic iniuation, baptism, like the Chrisdans later, and a 'sacred table' from which the uninitiated were rigorously kept away." Even he, however, had to admit that "the evidence for this is unsatisfactory, because scanty and not in agreement."^ This evidence is primarily drawn from Philo's scattered references to food and drink, rites, and mysteries.^ The difficulty lies in determining whether these allusions are metaphorical or refer to actual cultic practices. There is also a Roman decree in Josephus (Ant. 14.10.8 §§213-16) which refers to the practice of common meals among the Jews of Delos, but there is nothing to indicate that these had a mystical meaning. The meal of the Therapeutae, described by Philo in De Vita Contemplativa, is indeed a ritual. The food is said to recall the showbread of the temple, but the ritual does not in itself symbolize the process of salvation. Afterwards, however, two choirs perform, one of men and one of women. Then "when each choir has separately done its own part in the feast, having drunk as in the Bacchic rites of the strong wine of God's love, they mix and both together become a single choir, a copy of the choir set up of old beside the Red Sea" (85). Philo's comparison with the Bacchic rites and the repeated metaphor of drunkenness suggests that this ritual had a mystic character,^ but it is difficult to say how far he is accurately reporting the Therapeutae and how far he is intruding his own thought.^ The meal is preceded by an exposition ed., Understanding Mysticism (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, "1980) 20; B. McGinn, The Foundations of Mysticism: Origins to the Fifth Century (New York: Crossroad, 1991) xiii-xx. 3. On the Greek mysteries, see M. Nilsson, Geschichte der Griechischen Religion (Munich: Beck, 1950) 2:85-96; 329-53; 651-72; W. Burkert, Ancient Mystery Cults (Cambridge, Mass.; Harvard University Press, 1987); M. W. Meyer, The Ancient Mysteries: A Sourcebook (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1987). 4. Goodenough, By Light, Light, 8. 5. Ibid., 260-61. The (inconclusive) evidence of the symbols can be found in Goodenough, Jewish Symbols, passim. 6. Lease, "Jewish Mystery Cults," 873, categorizes this as "a quite humdrum weekly gathering," disregarding the analogy with the Bacchic rites. 7. On the reliabihty of Philo's account, see D. M. Hay, "Things Philo Said and Did Not Say about the Therapeutae," in SBL 1992 Seminar Papers (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992) 673-

212


of scripture, which, according to Philo, "treats the inner meaning conveyed in allegory. For to these people the whole law book seems to resemble a living creature with the literal ordinances for its body and for its soul the invisible mind laid up in its wording" (78). In view of this allegorical exegesis, we might expect that the recollection of the Red Sea would be taken as an allegory of spiritual deliverance, but even Philo does not suggest this. Because we have no independent evidence about the Therapeutae, we cannot say that they provide reliable evidence for a mystic ritual, since the mystic character of their celebration may only be apparent through the filter of Philo's account. Goodenough drew further support for his thesis from a series of prayers in the Apostolic Constitutions which Bousset had claimed were Jewish with only slight Christian interpolations.^ There is no doubt that these prayers are Christian in their present form. Accordingly, when we find instructions for preparation for baptism (Fragment 8, Apost. Const. 7.39.2-4) or for catechumens (Fragment 9, Apost. Const 8.6.5-8), we must be somewhat skeptical of Goodenough's claim that they are taken "from the rules for instructing a Jewish catechumen in preparation for initiation into the Jewish Mystery,"^ despite the Jewish character of the actual instructions. We may agree with Goodenough that the theology of these prayers is closely related to Philo (e.g., "the gnosis of the unbegotten God" and the glorification of the patriarchs). In most cases, however, we lack reliable indications as to how much of the material is Jewish and how that material was originally used. Christian theology was also profoundly influenced by the Platonic tradition in which Philo stood. A possible exception is found in Fragment 2 {Apost. Const. 7.36.1-6), which Bousset has called a Sabbatgebet. God has "created the world by Christ, and hast appointed the Sabbath in memory thereof.. . Thou hast also appointed festivals for the rejoicing of our souls that we might come into remembrance of that Sophia which was created by thee." Despite the 83; J. E. Taylor and R R. Davies. "The So-Called Therapeutae of De Vita Conlemplativa," HTR 91 (1998) 3-24. 8. W. Bousset, "Eine judische Gebetssammlung im siebenten Buch der apostolischen Konstitutionen." in Naclihchten von der K. Gesellscliafl der Wissenschaften zu Gottingen, Phil-Hist Kl. (1915/1916) 435-85; Goodenough, By Liglil, Light. 306-58. 9. Goodenough, By Light, Light, 326. See also K. Kohier, "The Essene Version of the Seven Benedictions as Preserved in the VII Book of the Apostolic Constitutions," HUCA 1 (1924) 410-25. D. A. Fiensy, Prayers Alleged lo Be Jewish: An Examination of the Constituliones Apostolorum (Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1985), argues that Jewish source material, whether oral or written, has been incorporated in a Christian compilation. Fiensy provides texts and translations of the prayers. An English translation can also be found in D. A. Fiensy and D. R. Darnell, "Hellenistic Synagogai Prayers," in OTP 2:671-97. 10. Fiensy, Prayers Alleged to Be Jewish, 230, notes the affinities of the prayers with the theology of Theophilus of Antioch, who in turn had considerable affinities with Philo. Fiensy argues that the form of the prayers is later than 100 C . E . and places the compilation about 300 c . E . in Syria.


213

patent identification of Christ and Sophia in the following verses, the entire emphasis on the Sabbath is Jewish, as can be seen from the rather awkward transition in verse 6 ("All which the Lord's day excels"), which seeks to subordinate the Sabbath to the Lord's day. It is probable, then, that Christ is substituted for Logos or Sophia in the creadon of the world in verse 1. What is suggested by this prayer is not a special set of mystic rituals but an understanding of the customary Jewish festivals, including the Sabbath, which linked them with sophia. In fact, Goodenough's strongest argument for a mystic liturgy lies not in the metaphorical allusions to bread and wine but in the application of Philo's allegorical mentality to the Jewish festivals; "It seems, a priori, incredible that Philo, who had to see 'something far more deeply interfused' in every word of Scripture, would then have celebrated Circumcision, the Seder, the Sabbath, New Year, the Day of Atonement, First Fruits, and the rest on a purely literal level."^^ The argument is not confined to Philo. Long before him Aristobulus linked the seventh day with wisdom and the origin of light (Fragment 5, Praep. Evang. 13.12.9) and added that "all the cosmos of living beings and growing things revolves in a series of sevens" {Praep. Evang. 13.12.13). For Aristobulus, the Sabbath was evidentiy laden with cosmic allusions. The prayer in Apost. Const. Fragment 2 shows how a symbolic understanding of the Sabbath persisted and passed over into Christianity. The fact that mystically inclined Jews such as Philo would have understood the Sabbath in a mystical sense does not in itself establish the existence of a mystic liturgy which was specially designed from such an understanding and from which noninitlates were excluded. Georgi has argued at length that the Sabbath service was the great forum for propaganda and proselytizing in the Hellenistic Diaspora.'^ Yet, he also entertains the possibility that part of the ceremony was set aside as a mystery from which the uninitiated were excluded. He bases this suggestion on the Pseudo-Orphic fragments and the fourteenth satire of Juvenal (verses 102-4), which speaks of a secret book of Moses that was designed only for the circumcised.^'* as well as Philo's use of mystery language. The suggestion that part of the ritual was esoteric is not in itself implausible, but neither is it more than a possibility. None of the evidence adduced speaks explicitiy of an esoteric ritual on the Sabbath. No special meals were associated with the Sabbath. We will return to the question of

11. Goodenough, Jewish Symbols, 12:21. 12. D. Georgi, The Opponents of Paul in Second Corinthians (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986), 83-117. 13. Ibid., 115. 14. "Whatsoever Moses hath delivered in the secret volume. Not to show the ways, unless to one observing the same rites. To lead the circumcised only to a sought for fountain."

214


a mystic meal in connection with Joseph and Aseneth, but there again we will find no firm evidence for a special mystic ritual.

Mystic Philosophy Goodenough readily admitted that the evidence for a mystic ritual was unsatisfactory, but added that "however much or little the Jewish Mystery may have developed Its own cult practices. It seems as a mystic philosophy, to have been the heart and core of Greek Judaism."'^ The use of mystery language in connection with philosophy, or rather the understanding of philosophy as a mystery, is clearly exemplified already in P l a t o . T h e conception is clearly formulated in the words attributed to Socrates in the Phaedo 80d: And those who founded the mysteries seem not to be bad fellows at all, but in reality to have long ago hinted that an uninitiated man who comes into Hades would lie in the mud, but that the purified and initiated man would on his arrival there dwell with the gods. So then there are, as those who have to do with the mysteries say, "Many who bear the wand, but few Bacchi." These latter are, in my opinion, none other than those who have rightly pursued philosophy. Similarly, in the Symposium philosophy is presented as the true mystery. While Plato's "mysticism" is rather different in kind from that of the mystery cults, its authenticity should not be discounted. In the history of Christian mysticism, a distinction between mystical theology and mystical experience is difficult to maintain. In the words of Bernard McGinn: "Rather than being something added on to the mystical experience, mystical theory in most cases precedes and guides the mystic's whole way of life."'^ There is no dispute that Philo freely used the language of the mysteries.'^ Moses is said to have initiated the Israelites into the mysteries by the covenant. Within the mysteries of Moses, greater and lesser mysteries are distinguished. Moses, the high priest, and others are at various times described as hierophants. The mysteries in question are not primarily rituals. 15. Goodenough, By Light, Light, 8. 16. Goodenough, "Literal Mystery in Hellenistic Judaism," in R. P. Casey, S. Lake, and A. Lake, eds., Quantulacumque: Studies Presented to Kirsopp Lake (London: Christophers, 1937) 227-41; G. Bornkamm, "Mysterion," TDNT A (1967) 808-10; McGinn, The Foundations of Mysticism, 23-61. 17. McGinn, The Foundations of Mysticism, xiv. 18. See H. A. Wolfson, Philo: Foundations of Religious Philosophy in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam (2 vols.; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. 1947) 1:43-55. On Philo's mystical philosophy, see especially D. Winston, Logos and Mystical Philosophy in Philo of Alexandria (Cincinnati: Hebrew IJnion College Press, 1985).


215

When Moses initiates people into the mysteries, he exhorts them "to practice sincerity and reject vanity, to embrace truth and simplicity as vital necessaries and to rise in rebellion against the mythical fables impressed on their souls from their earliest years" (De Virtutibus 33, 178). The lesser mysteries involve "the passage from the life of the passions to the practice of virtue" {De Sacrificiis 17, 63) and the acquisition of the knowledge of God. The higher mysteries involve a more direct knowledge of God. Throughout, the true mysteries are contained in the Jewish law. Accordingly, Wolfson rather minimalisdcally concludes that the use of mystery language is only a veneer on a religion which is thoroughly dominated by the Mosaic law. Goodenough, however, has rightly insisted that "the question whether Philo's use of mystic terms made his religion a true 'Mystery' depends on what Philo thought was a true mystery, not upon our definitions. . . . As Plato scorned those who only carried the thyrsus, while he looked for salvation through philosophic contemplation which would lead to the vision of the forms, Philo felt that the true mystery, the one which actually purified and elevated the soul, was revealed in the Torah as allegoricaily interpreted."^^ In short, that which is conceived to be the supreme mystery is ipso facto a real (Goodenough says "literal") mystery, whether it involves a mystery ritual or not.-^^ Goodenough claimed that "by Philo's dme and long before, Judaism in the Greek-speaking world, especially in Egypt, had been transformed into a Mystery"^^ in the sense that it was imbued with a mystical philosophy. Goodenough outlined that philosophy as follows: The objective of this Judaism was salvation in a mystical sense. God was no longer only the God presented in the Old Testament: He was the Absolute, connected with phenomena by His Light-Stream, the Logos or Sophia. The hope and aim of man was to leave created things with their sordid complicadons, and to rise to incorruption, immortality, life, by climbing the mystic ladder, traversing the Royal Road of the Light-Stream.^^ To Goodenough's mind, the mysdcism of the Light-Stream was a widespread feature of Hellenistic religion. Accordingly, when Goodenough looked for Jewish mysticism he looked primarily for references to the Light-Stream, 19. Goodenough, Jewish Symbols, 12:20. 20. See further D. Winston, "Was Philo a Mystic?" in J. Dan and F. Talmage, eds.. Studies in Jewish Mysticism (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1982) 15-39; idem, "Philo's Mysticism," The Studia Philonica Annual 8 (1996) 74-82. Winston argues that Philo can lay claim to being a mystic in a qualified sense. 21. Goodenough, By Light, Light, 7. 22. Ibid.

216


Logos, and Sophia. It was through these that salvation was mediated in the Jewish mystery. Yet the hieros logos of the mystery remained the Jewish Torah, interpreted allegorically as a wellspring of sophia. The mystery envisaged by Philo, then, could be described as a philosophical mystery, but Goodenough defended the "literal" reality of such a mystery and kept open the possibility that it also involved a cultic ritual. Outside of Philo, the best evidence for this philosophical mysticism is found in Aristobulus and more especially the Wisdom of S o l o m o n . O v e r and above his allegorical interpretation, Aristobulus briefly refers to the cosmic priority of wisdom, "for all light has its origin in it" (Praep. Evang. 13.12.9). The further connection of wisdom with the number seven and the Sabbath also hints that wisdom has a pivotal place in Aristobulus's view of the cosmos, but what remains of his work is too fragmentary to support any reconstruction of a Sophia-mysticism from his work. Ultimately, Aristobulus's greatest contribution to our understanding of mystic Judaism was through the preservation of the Orphic fragments, which will be discussed below. The Wisdom of Solomon provides the most substantial evidence for Philonic Judaism outside of Philo. We have noted above the pivotal place of Sophia/Logos In that work. The relevance of its conceptions for mystic Judaism is evident from two references to mysteria. In 2:22, the wicked are misled because they did not know "the mysteries of God," which are equated with "the reward of holiness" — in effect, the fate of souls after death. The second is in 6:22: "But what wisdom is, and how she came into being, I will declare, and will not conceal from you mysteries." In short, the nature of wisdom is itself a mystery, which is penetrated only by the gift of God, who is the guide of wisdom and director of the wise (7:15). Wisdom is an emanation of the glory of the Almighty and a reflection of eternal light and even superior to light (7:25-29). It forms the bridge between human and divine by entering into holy souls. She is initiated (mystis) into the knowledge of God. Solomon "takes her to live with him and through her he will have immortality" (8:13). In all of this, wisdom appears as an active agent which has been initiated into the mysteries of God and can be a mystagogue for others, just as, conversely, God is the mystagogue for the mysteries of wisdom. The way in which wisdom serves as guide to salvation is illustrated in the resume of the exodus in chapters 10-19. In all of this, wisdom is the focus of a mystical philosophy. Despite the famous allusion to the cosmic significance of the high priest's garments, there is nothing to suggest a mystery cult focused on wisdom — only that the cult of the Jewish temple, whether known from pilgrimages or only from scripture, was interpreted with mystic symbolism by 23. Ibid., 268-82.


217

those who shared this p h i l o s o p h y . T h e soteriology of the book fits well enough with Goodenough's oudine of the mystery, although the atdtude to "created things with their sordid complicadons" is ambiguous. On the one hand, nature provides the stepping stones to the knowledge of God. On the other, the perishable body weighs down the soul, and the uUimate salvation is immortality with God.^^ Goodenough claimed another witness to this philosophical mysticism in the Oratio ad Graecos attributed to Jusdn Martyr.^^ This document is an apologia for abandoning traditional Greek religion in favor of the Logos. The first four chapters are devoted to denunciations of the immoralides of Greek gods and heroes. This kind of polemic was traditional in popular Hellenistic philosophy and "might have been written by a Greek scepdc or rhetorician at any time after the Third Century B.C."^^ The fifth chapter invites the Greeks to "come and partake of incomparable Sophia, and be instructed by the divine Logos and learn the Incorruptible King" (basilea aphtharton). It goes on to speak of the soul "permeated with the power of the Logos" and claims that, while this instrucdon does not make philosophers or rhetoricians, "it makes mortals become immortals, human beings gods, and from the earth leads to the realms beyond Olympus." The Logos "drives from the recesses of the soul the terrible sensual affections," especially lust, and so enables the soul to return to him who made It. Goodenough righdy points out the absence of any distinctively Christian references and the abundance of parallels to Philo. His conclusion, that it is the work of a proselyte to Hellenistic Judaism, is possible, but remains very hypothetical. Whatever its origin, the Oratio provides a striking parallel to the philosophical mysticism of Philo.

Esotericism A major aspect of the religion of the mysteries was their esoteric character. Esotericism may take different forms. In its simplest form it entails a secret knowledge or experience which is reserved for the initiates and may not be divulged to others. The secrecy was respected with the utmost seriousness in antiquity. Livy (31.14) tells how two youths who unwittingly intruded on the Eleusinian mysteries in 200 B.C.E. were punished by d e a t h . W i t h i n Judaism, 24. Cf. the description of the Jerusalem cult in the Letter of Aristeas 99, where again the point at issue is how the ceremonies are perceived. 25. See J. J. Collins, "The Root of Immortality: Death in the Context of Jewish Wisdom," HTR 71 (1979) 177-92, reprinted in idem. Seers, Sibyls and Sages in Hellenistic-Roman Judaism (Leiden: Bnll, 1997) 351-67. 26. Goodenough, By Light. Light, 298-305. 27. Ibid., 299. 28. Nilsson, Geschichte, 2:86.

218


Josephus says that the Essenes were obliged by oath to keep secret the books of the sect and the names of the angels.Juvenal {Satires 14:102-4) refers to the "secret volume" of Moses and secret ways for the circumcised. Occasional passages in Philo are also susceptible to the interpretation that some Jewish teaching was secret. The full knowledge of Sophia "cannot be told to all since he who reveals the Secret to the imprudent and unworthy destroys and overthrows the law of perfection of the holy Mysteries" {Questions on Genesis 4.8). One of the fragments says explicitly that "It is not permitted to speak out the sacred mysteries to the uninitiated until they shall have been purified with the perfect purification"; another passage warns, "One must not share everything with everyone, that is, not teachings and practices which are especially sacred. For there are many prerequisites which must be satisfied by people who aspire to share in these things . . . in order that they may not, like intemperate youths, get drunk from surfeit and superabundance when they partake at the sacred table and so be changed for the worse: to such people it is not permitted." Even if we understand the sacred table metaphorically as instruction, these passages state clearly that not all the teachings of Judaism should be immediately available to Gentiles. Of course, Philo stops far short of the sworn secrecy of the mysteries, and it is difficult to know whether his opinion on these matters is representative of the practice of the Hellenistic synagogue. Only one other passage in the Hellenistic Jewish Diaspora writings clearly suggests a secret teaching. That is the opening verse of the Orphic fragment: "I will speak to those for whom It is lawful; profane ones, close the doors." The opening injunction may be no more than a literary imitation of the mysteries, but at least it reflects a desire to present Judaism as a religion whose most important doctrines were secret. Esotericism may also be used in a broader sense, which does not require an intention to conceal, but only de facto mysteriousness. If the true meaning of the Jewish law is known only through allegorical interpretation, then an outsider can scarcely hope to discover it without special instruction. In this sense, the entire corpus of allegorical interpretation posits an esoteric revelation, even though it is devoted to divulging the mystery. Similarly, revelation gained through dreams, visions, and the like is not publicly accessible, and so is de facto esoteric. Neither of these broader uses implies deliberate secrecy, but they do underline the supernatural character of the religion and claim that it involves more than can be directly known from nature without special revelation.

29. J.W. 2.8.7 §142.


219

Heavenly Revelations This brings us to the broader use of the term mystical for wisdom through revelations of a heavenly world leading to an otherworldly salvation. In this broader use, mysdcism does not necessarily involve a ritual or deliberate secrecy, and the mystical philosophy is not necessarily related to Logos or Sophia. It does, of course, involve de facto esotericism. The mysdcal quality lies in the (alleged) direct experience of the supernatural and the transcendent nature of salvadon. Whether one wishes to use the word mystical for these revelations or prefers to restrict it to more narrowly defined phenomena, what is important is to recognize their affinities with the mysteries and their difference over against the other writings we have been reviewing. The locus of reveladon has been moved from this world to a higher one. The medium of salvadon is no longer human wisdom, philosophical or tradidonal, nor even the Jewish law in its literal form, but rather the reveladon gained by excepdonal experiences of particular individuals. It is, of course, understood that such higher revelation is not opposed to the Jewish law, or even to Inductive reason, but it adds something over and above them which contributes directly to salvadon and is the main focus of attention. We will find this kind of mysticism in the Hellenistic Jewish apocalypses, but also in narraUves such as Joseph and Aseneth and the Testament of Job. The appeal to higher revelation does not abandon the consistent attempt of Diaspora Judaism to find a common basis with Hellenistic culture. Such appeal to higher revelation was characteristic of the Hellenlsdc world, as evidenced by, for example, the popularity of the mysteries.^" The "mysdcal" Jewish writings continue to preach the common ethic of Hellenistic Judaism. No firm line can be drawn between the philosophical and the mystical in Philo or the Wisdom of Solomon, where the grace of revelation is ultimately seen as the fulfillment, not the negation, of human nature. Mystical experiences were not peculiar to the Jews. It is significant that one of the earliest mystical Jewish works is ascribed pseudonymously to Orpheus.

The Pseudo-Orphic Fragments The question of a Jewish mystery in the earliest stage of Hellenistic Judaism is raised most directly by the Pseudo-Orphic fragments. According to Eusebius {Praep. Evang. 13.12), Aristobulus claims that Orpheus, like Py30. See M. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism {2 vols.; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974) 1:210-18; H. W. Attridge, "Greek and Latin Apocalypses," Semeia 14 (1979) 159-86.

220


thagoias, Socrates, and Plato, imitates Moses, in verses on the hieros logos, for "He expresses thus concerning the maintaining of all things by divine power, their being generated and God's being over all things" and proceeds to cite a poem of forty-one hexameters. A shorter form of this poem, consisting of twenty-one hexameters, is found in two works falsely attributed to Justin Martyr, De Monorchia chap. 2 and Cohortatio ad Gentiles chap. 15. Further, there are several short quotations in Clement's Protrepticus and Stromateis. Most of these coincide with the Justinian text, but some in Stromateis 5.123-24 are found in Eusebius and not in Pseudo-Justin. Finally, the late Tubingen Theosophy offers a compilation of the older witnesses and runs to forty-six lines. The recensions are outlined as follows by Carl Holladay, following Nikolaus Walter: Recension A, the shortest recension, is reflected in Pseudo-Justin and portions of Clement's quotations. Recension B, reflected primarily in Clement, is distinguished from Recension A by the addition of a section about a "Chaldean" astrologer, which is commonly designated the "Abraham" section (vss. 27-31), and concluding material about God (vss. 38-40; 43-44). Recension C is distinguished by the addition of the "Moses" portions (vss. 2, 41-42, possibly 25) and some other redactional expansions (15, 1820, 25-26, 32, 44b-46). It is found primarily in the citation of Aristobulus in Eusebius. Recension D, found in the Tubingen Theosophy, is the longest form of the poem and contains Christian redactional elements.3' The textual history of the Orphic poem is extremely complicated. The consensus of scholarship is that the short recension, A, Is the oldest. The later recensions are directly developed from this in a number of stages. Schiirer thought it possible that all three Christian authors selected different material from a large pool of Pseudo-Orphic verses, but this view has found little support in recent y e a r s . S o m e scholars defend a theory of two recensions, a short one found in Pseudo-Justin and a long one found in Eusebius, with Clement in a mediating position reflecting knowledge of both.^^ The devel31. C. R. Holladay, Fragments from Hellenistic Jewish Authors. Volume IV: Orphica (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1996) 49; cf. N. Walter, Der Thoraausleger Aristobulus (TU 86; Berlin: Akademie, 1964) 103-15; 202-61; "Pseudo-Orpheus," in idem, Fragmente jiidischhellenistisclie Dichtung: Pseudo-Phokylides, Pseudo-Orpheus, Gefdlschte Verse auf Namen griechischer Dichter (JSHRZ 4.3; Gutersloh: Mohn, 1983) 173-278. 32. See M. Goodman, in E, Schiirer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 B.C.-A.D. 135) (rev. and ed. G. Vermes, F. Millar, and M. Goodman; 3 vols.; Edinburgh: Clark, 1973-87) 3.1:664, who allows this as a possibility but regards the priority of the pseudo-Justin text as more probable. 33. A.-M, Denis, Fragmenta Pseudepigraphorum quae supersunt Graeca (Leiden: Brill, 1970) 163-67; M. LaFargue, "Orphica," in OTP 2:795-801. A slightly different tworecension theory is held by C. Riedweg, Jiidisch-hellenistische Imitation eines orphischen


221

opmenta! theory developed by Walter and elaborated by Holladay remains, however, the most persuasive view. The judgment that the earliest form of the poem is that found in Pseudo-Justin rests on a number of arguments.^'* Clement demonstrably knew and used Aristobulus, in the immediate context of the latter's Orphic quotation. Yet, he cites the verses that seem to refer to Abraham, but never those that clearly refer to Moses. Since the "Mosaic recension" is found only in Eusebius and the Theosophy, Walter concludes that these verses at least were inserted after the time of Clement and before Eusebius, since Clement presumably would not have passed over an "Orphic" testimony to Moses. Further, R. Keller argued that the Eusebian form of the hymn does not correspond to the introductory comments of Aristobulus, which are concerned with the role of God in creation. By contrast, Aristobulus fails to underline the explicit reference to Moses. Keller infers that the poem cited by Aristobulus corresponded to that found in Pseudo-Justin.Walter admits this as a possibility but argues that it is more likely that Aristobulus cited a completely different passage, perhaps Fragment 168 or Fragment 169, 1-5 or Fragment 298 of the Orphic fragments edited by Kern,^'' any of which would fit the context better, or perhaps a passage that is simply lost. This radical conclusion is not required by the texts. All the recensions provide some statement which corresponds to the introductory comments on God's role in creation (e.g., line 10). The fact that this is not the sole theme of the poem cannot disallow the quotation. There is no reason to deny that Aristobulus quoted some variant of the Orphic hymn we have. It is possible that the hymn quoted by Aristobulus included not only the Justinian verses but all the verses known to Clement. While lines 41 and 42, the Mosaic r e c e n s i o n , a r e not found in Clement and would not have been passed over, the case for the so-called Abrahamic recension is different. The claim that Abraham saw God might have been suppressed in the Justinian version for reasons of orthodoxy. From a stylistic viewpoint, however, the Justinian text reads more smoothly without the Abrahamic verses, which Hieros Logos: Beobachtungen zu OF 245 und 247 (sog. Testament des Orpheus) (Tubingen: Narr, 1993). See C. R. Holladay, "The Textual Tradition of Pseudo-Orpheus: Walter or Riedweg?" in P. Schafer, ed., Geschichte — Tradition — Reflexion: Festschrift fiir Martin Hengel sum 70. Geburtstag. 1: Judentum (Ttibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1996) 159-80. 34. LaFargue, "Orphica," 795-96, is exceptional in holding that "J [Pseudo-Justinl is a cleaned-up, orthodoxizing version of an originally longer text more adequately represented by E lEusebius] and T [Tubingen Theosophyl." 35. Walter, Der Thoraausleger Aristobulus, 104-8. 36. R. Keller, "De Aristobulo Judaeo" (Phil. Diss., Bonn, 1948), summanzed by Walter, Der Thoraausleger Aristobulus, 109. 37. O. Kern, Orphicorum Fragmenta (Berlin: Weidmann, 1922). 38. These verses refer to a "water-born" one (hydogenes, an emendation for hylogenes) who received a twofold law from God.

222


cause an awkward transition from line 32 to 33. We may accept the consensus that the text found in Pseudo-Justin is prior. There is a significant difference between the view of Judaism in the Justinian recension and in the Abrahamlc one. The theme of the shorter recension is monotheism and the invisibility of God. It Is closely paralleled in Sib. Or. 3:1-45, a passage of uncertain provenance prefixed to the Third Sibyl. The Orphic dress here has the usual apologetic effect of placing a testimony to Jewish beliefs on the lips of a figure revered by the Greeks. Yet, the choice of pseudonym is always significant. The emphasis on monotheism and invisibility was most likely to appeal to people of a philosophical bent, and it reflects a similar disposition in the Jewish authors. Whether or not the Jusfinian version reflects the original poem cited by Aristobulus, there is no doubt, in view of the sibylline parallel, that it represents a strand of Hellenistic Judaism. It makes no mention of the law but bases its religion on a philosophical conception of spiritual purity. Understanding of the singleness of God is the heart of this religion, and it might be attained by various means. It should be said that this kind of religion is especially close to what we find in Aristobulus and Philo. The Abrahamic recension differs pointedly from this by asserting that there is an excepfion to the human inability to see God — a single man from the Chaldean race. This individual was idendfied as "Abraham or his son" by Clement.^^ The idenfification with Abraham is supported by Sib. OK 3:218, which refers to the origins of the Jewish race in Ur of the Chaldees. We should note, however, that Philo refers to Moses as a Chaldean, and the same reference is possible here too."**" In any case, the Chaldean is said to be knowledgeable in the astral w o r l d . I n the Eusebian recension, he surpasses Orpheus, who can only point out the traces of God on earth.^^ We are reminded of Philo's explanation of Israel as "one who sees God.'"*^ It does not, of course, follow that all Jews see God directly, but they can at least contemplate the description of the divine throne, which is guaranteed by Abraham's experience. This passage, then, lends a new dimension to the understanding of the poem. In view of the parallel in the Exagoge of Ezekiel, we may confi39. Stromateis 5.14.123. 40. Philo, De Vita Mosis 1.5. He also refers to Abraham as a Chaldean, De Virtutibus 39, 212. 41. Cf. the tradition of Abraham's ascent, which is often repeated in the Pseudepigrapha. most obviously in the Apocalypse of Abrafiam and the Testament of Abraiiam, but also in 4 Ezra 3:13-14; 2 Baruch 4:5; Pseudo-Philo, Biblical Antiquities 18:5. 42. Lines 19-20. See Georgi, The Opponents of Paul, 54. Georgi emends line 25 to read: lepton emoi, pasin de dekaptychon anthropoisln. Orpheus says that a cloud blocks the vision of God. It is a light one for him, but a tenfold one for all humanity. So also LaFargue. 43. Goodenough. By Light, Light, 177. Philo. De Praemiis et Poenis 43-46. See E. Birnbaum. "What Does Philo Mean by 'Seeing God': Some Methodological Considerations," in SBL 1995 Seminar Papers (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1995) 532-55.


223

dently claim that the Abrahamic hymn also represents a strand of Judaism which dates back to the second century B.C.E. or possibly even to the late third.'*^ Finally, the Mosaic recension rather resembles Sirach 24:23 ("all this is the book of the law of the Lord") in attempdng to bring diverse material under the aegis of the Torah (cf. also the reference to divine laws in line 2, which is found only in recensions C and D).'*^ The effect of the addition is ambiguous, as is also the case in Sirach: does the law now take precedence over the heavenly experience of the Chaldean, or is that experience precisely what is significant about the law? While Judaism is more clearly related to the Torah, the hymn could be taken as an invitation to interpret the Torah in the light of Abraham's experience. The dominant image of the poem is still that of God seated on his throne. The Torah is no more than the mediator of that vision. Whether we should further think of two levels of Torah interpretation, as Georgi suggests,^^ Is not certain. It is not required by the expression kata diplaka nomon, which may simply refer to the two tablets. However, such an interpretation is encouraged by the prominence of allegorical interpretation in Aristobulus and the later Alexandrian tradition, and is quite compatible with the view that what is important in the Torah is the vision of God. If the final recension is understood in this way, then the "Mosaic recension" may have only been making explicit the dependence of Orpheus on Moses which was already presumed by Aristobulus. The "mystical" character of these Orphic fragments lies in their explicit esotericism and, in the Abrahamic recension, the higher revelation of Abraham's vision. The pseudonym of Orpheus lent itself readily to esotericism. While the older elaborate reconstructions of Orphism are now viewed with skepticism,"*^ Orphika are linked with Bacchika, or Bacchic rituals, as early as Herodotus, and Orpheus is linked with Bacchic behavior (haccheuein) in Euripides.*^ While the name of Orpheus need not in all circumstances evoke the 44. Holladay, Fragments. 4:63, finds it quite likely that this recension goes back to the time of Aristobulus and that Recension A dates from the early second century or late third. 45. The word dekaptychon in line 25 has often been taken as a reference to the Decalogue but may simply mean "manifold," as a counterpart to lepton, following Georgi's reading of the line. 46. Georgi, The Opponents of Paul, 55. 47. For a succinct statement of the status quaestionis, see W. Burkert, Orphism and Bacchic Mysteries: New Evidence and Old Problems of Interpretation (Berkeley: Center for Hermeneutical Studies, 1977). For older reconstructions, see E. Rohde, Psyche: The Cult of Souls and Belief in Immortality among the Greeks (New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co,, 1925); A. Dieterich, Nekyia: Beitrdge zur Erkldrung der neuentdeckten Petrusapokalypse (Leipzig: Teubner, 1893). See further W. K. C. Guthrie, Orpheus and Greek Religion: A Study of the Orphic Movement (2d ed,; London: Methuen, 1952), and, on the Hellenistic period, Nilsson, Geschichte. 2:232-37. 48. Herodotus 2,81; Euripides, Hippolytus 952-54; Burkert, Orphism, 4.

224


Bacchic mysteries, it was widely associated with them. The Bacchic mysteries are associated with the hope for an afterlife already in the classical period.*^ Such a concern is also implied in the view that the body is a tomb, which Plato attributes to "Orpheus and his followers" in the Cratylus (400c). Surprisingly, the Jewish Orphic fragments do not touch at all on the subject of the afterlife, although the divine throne is often associated with the rewards and punishments of the afterlife in the Jewish apocalyptic literature. The Jewish Orphic fragments exploit the connection with Orpheus only in presenting the monotheistic teaching as a mystery from which the profane are excluded. Judaism is set above Orphism by the claim that Abraham enjoyed the vision of God.

Ezekiel the IVagedian Another early specimen of "mystical" Judaism is found in the drama on the Exodus by Ezekiel, which, at 269 lines, is the most extensive remnant of the Greco-Jewish poets apart from the Sibylline Oracles.^^ Ezekiel is described as a writer of tragedies in Eusebius and Clement, but no fragments of any other work have survived. He is usually assumed to have written in Alexandria, although there is no explicit e v i d e n c e . T h e upper and lower hmits of his date are provided by the translation of the Septuagint, in the third century, and by the fact that the text was known to Alexander Polyhistor in the midfirst century B.C.E. A possible clue to his date has been sought in the description of the phoenix (Praep. Evang. 9.29.254-69), which goes beyond the biblical text and may have been prompted by the appearance of the bird in Egypt in the third century B.C.E., in the reign of Ptolemy III Euergetes I.^^ Howard 49. See now the gold plate from Hipponion in southern Italy (ca. 400 B . C . E . ) , which relates the way of the dead to that of the mystai and bacchoi. See further Burkert, Orphism, 2-4, for evidence from inscriptions and art. 50. Praep. Evang. 9.28; 29.4-16. A passage in Epiphanius, Adversus Haereses 64.29.6, on the serpent, was attributed to Ezekiel by J. Scaliger in 1658; see A. M. Denis, Introduction aux Pseudepigraphes Grecs d'Ancien Testament (SVTP 1; Leiden: Brill, 1970) 275. The text is printed by Denis with the undisputed fragments, but there is no solid basis for the attribution. See now the edition and commentary by C. R. Holladay, Fragments from Hellenistic Jewish Authors. Volume II: Poets (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989)301-529- Other commentaries can be found in H. Jacobson, The Exagoge of Ezekiel (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983); R. G. Robertson, "Ezekiel the Tragedian," in OTP, 2:803-19; E. Vogt, Tragiker Ezechiel (JSHRZ 4.3; Gutersloh: Mohn, 1983) 113-33. 51. R M. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria (2 vols.; Oxford: Clarendon, 1972) 1:707; J. Wieneke, Ezechielis ludaei poetae Alexandrini fabulae quae inscribitur Exagoge fragmenta (Munster; Monasterii Westfalorum, 1931) 124-26. 52. K. Kuiper, "Le poete juif Ezechiel," REJ 46 (1903) 171; Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1:708; Wieneke, Ezechielis ludaei, 121. On the appearance of the phoenix in the time of Euergetes I, see Tacitus, Annals 6.28.


225

Jacobson, however, has noted that there is also a detailed description of the phoenix in the Ladn author Manilius, which was written at the very beginning of the first century B.C.E., and concluded that "at the beginning of the first century B.C. there was a heightened interest in the Phoenix and his symbolic value for momentous events."^^ He suggests a date for Ezekiel in the late second century. In fact, however, any time from the late third to the early first century B.C.E. IS possible.^'* While Ezekiel was not a great poet, he constructed a competent drama in accordance with the classical conventions,^^ and his vocabulary "attests a full knowledge of tragic and particularly Euripidean usage."^^ The use of such a typically Greek form does not necessarily require that the work was written with a Gendle audience in mind.^'' It may equally have served to reassure Hellenized Jews that their tradidon was capable of expression in a Greek form.^^ Ezekiel follows the biblical story rather closely,^^ but his occasional departures are significant. So, in his treatment of the Passover, he neglects to mendon the requirement of circumcision.^*' Judaism for Ezekiel is not consdtuted by its disdnctive markings.^' It can compete with other traditions on a common stage. The treatment of Moses' marriage to Zipporah has also been 53. Jacobson, The Exagoge of Ezekiel, 12. Jacobson provides a thorough review of the arguments for dating. 54. So Goodman, in Schiirer, The History of the Jewish People, 3.1:565; E. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism: The Reinvention of Jewish Tradition (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998) 128. Holladay, Fragments, 2:311-12, .specifies only the second century B . C . E . Robertson, "Ezekiel the Tragedian," 804, opts for the first part of the second century B . C . E . 55. A. Kappelmacher, "Zur Tragodie der hellenistischen Zeit," Wietier Studien 44 (1924-25) 69-86; I. Trencsenyi-Waldapfel, "Une Tragedie Grecque a Sujet Biblique," Acta Orientalia 2 (1952) 143-63; B. Snell, "Ezechiels Moses-Drama," Antike und Abendland 13 (1967) 150-64; J. Strugneil, "Notes on the Text and Metre of Ezekiel the Tragedian's 'Exagoge,'" HTR 50 (1967) 449-57. The fragments of Ezekiel are the most extensive remnants of Hellenistic tragedy. 56. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1:708. Jacobson, The Exagoge of Ezekiel. 23-28, also demonstrates the influence of Sophocles and especially Aeschylus. 57. Contra C. R. Holladay, "The Portrait of Moses in Ezekiel the Tragedian," SBLASP 10 (1976) 447-52. 58. Trencsenyi-Waldapfel, "Une Tragedie," 160-61, saw a polemic against Ezekiel in the Letter of Aristeas 136, where a tragic poet named Theodektes was afflicted with a cataract when he was about to use a biblical theme. However, Pseudo-Aristeas is primarily concerned to show why the Jewish Torah is not better known to the Greeks, and does not necessarily disapprove of Jewish use of tragedy as a means of expression. 59. The exegetical and midrashic aspects of Ezekiel's work are well documented in Jacobson's commentary. 60. J. B. Segal, The Hebrew Passover from the Earliest Times (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1963) 24; Wieneke, Ezechielis ludaei, 124. 61. J. M. G. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora from Alexander to Trajan (323 BCE-117 CE) (Edinburgh: Clark, 1996) 137, demurs but grants that "Ezekiel may have been loath to draw attention to a rite which associated Jews and Egyptians but appeared absurd to Greeks." So too Jacobson, The Exagoge, 135, who also allows that Ezekiel did not want to offend non-Jews in the audience.

226


taken to reflect a universalistic attitude. Only two lines refer to this episode, but they note that Zipporah was given "to a stranger." Such a statement must be taken to imply a positive attitude towards mixed marriages.^^ The two major departures from the biblical text concern the dream of Moses and the description of the phoenix. The dream has attracted more scholarly attention than any other aspect of the play and has been taken by Cerfaux and Goodenough as evidence for a Jewish mystery cult.^^ The dream begins with a vision of a great throne above Mt. Sinai. Then the figure on the throne beckons to Moses, gives him a scepter and crown, and enthrones him. The figure himself vacates his throne. Moses enjoys a view of the entire earth round about and also the regions above the heaven and below the earth. A multitude of stars fall at his feet. Then Raguel interprets the dream, saying that Moses will overthrow (or set up?) a great throne (megan tina exanasteseis thronon)^* and will be judge and leader, and will see "what is, what was before and is to come." The use of a dream is a familiar element of Greek tragedy, and the dreams of Joseph provide a biblical precedent. Holladay has suggested that the installation of Moses on the throne establishes him as a Greek mantis by analogy with Apollo, who is installed on a throne by Zeus.^^ However, Zeus does not vacate his throne for Apollo, and the "mantle throne" is not described in royal terms, as is the case in Ezekiel. The most striking aspect of the dream is that the figure who initially occupies the throne (presumably God) vacates it. This element goes far beyond what we find in such visions as Testament of Levi 8, which may be fairly close to it in time.^^ The nearest parallel is perhaps the Similitudes of Enoch, where "that son of man" is installed on a throne and given the function of judge.^^ The parallel with Enoch is all the more striking, because in the present form of the Similitudes "that son of man" is idenfified as Enoch, the seer who is given knowledge of what is above the heaven, what is and is to come in the course of his visions. 62. So also Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 129-30; pace Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 138. 63. L. Cerfaux, "Influence des Mystferes sur le Judaisme Alexandrin avant Philon," Receuil L. Cerfaux [BETL 6; Gembloux: Duculot, 1954] 1:81-85; Goodenough, By Light, Light, 288-91. 64. See Jacobson, The Exagoge of Ezekiel, 93. If the sense is "overthrow," the reference is presumably to Pharaoh. In any case, there is a discrepancy between the dream and the interpretation. 65. Holladay, "The Portrait," 451-52. Cf. esp. Aeschylus's Eumenides 17-19; also 60921, where Apollo functions in a judicial role. 66. For Jewish traditions of enthronement, see J. J. Collins, "A Throne in the Heavens: Apotheosis in Pre-Christian Judaism," in J. J. Collins and M. Fishbane, eds.. Death, Ecstasy, and Otherworldly Journeys (Albany: State University of New York, 1995) 41-58. 67. J. Theisohn, Der auserwahlte Richter (SUNT 12; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1975) 38-99; J. J. Collins, "The Son of Man in First Century Judaism," NTS 38 (1992) 448-66.


227

The tradition of a vision on Mt. Sinai in which Moses was made Idng is found several times in later writings, most notably in Philo but also in the midrashim.^^ There is litde doubt that the tradidon was inspired by midrashic reflection on such scriptural passages as Exod. 7:1 ("I have made you a god to P h a r a o h " ) . T h i s exegetical basis is not evident in Ezekiel, so he quite probably drew on a tradition which was already current.^'* Ezekiel's vision has rightly been recognized as an early witness to the emerging tradidon of merkabah mysdcism, which is attested in the apocalypdc literature and condnues in the Hekalot writings of the Rabbinic period.^* More important than the source of the imagery in the dream is its function and significance. Meeks has suggested that "the most common function of ascension stories in literature of the period and milieu we are considering is as a guarantee of esoteric tradition,"''^ but he admits that Moses' kingship is scarcely related to this function. Yet, the kingship of Moses is evidently of central importance in Ezekiel. The particular combination of motifs which we find here must be understood within the context of the drama itself. In view of the fragmentary state of the text, it is of course difficult to propose a view of the whole. Trencsenyi-Waldapfel has offered a plausible reconstruction, according to which the drama consisted of five acts and was confined to the first fifteen chapters of E x o d u s . A c t One introduces Moses in Midian, where he meets the maiden at the well. Act Two is set at the house of Raguel, where Moses recounts his dream to Raguel and is given Zipporah in marriage. Act Three describes the encounter with God on Mt. Sinai and gives a description of the plagues in advance. Act Four involves the actual departure from Egypt and the report of the incident at the sea. Act Five corresponds to Exod. 15:23-25 and concludes with the arrival at Elim.^* Whether 68, W. Meeks, "Moses as God and King," in J. Neusner, ed.. Religions in Antiquity: Essays in Memoiy of E. R. Goodenough {Leiden: Brill, 1968) 354-59, 69, Ibid., 355. 70, For traditions of enthronement, see further F. T. Fallon, The Enthronement of Sabaoth (Leiden: Brill, 1978). 71, P. van der Horst, "Moses' Throne Vision in Ezekiel the Dramatist," JJS 34 (1983) 21-29, reprinted in idem. Essays on the Jewish World of Early Christianity (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1990) 63-71. On the merkabah tradition, see I. Gruenwald, Apocalyptic and Merkavah Mysticism (Leiden: Brill, 1980); and M, Mach, "From Apocalypticism to Early Jewish Mysticism," in J. J. Collins, ed.. The Encyclopedia of Apocalypticism. Volume 1: The Origins of Apocalypticism in Judaism and Christianity (New York: Continuum, 1998) 229-64, 72, Meeks, "Moses as God and King," 367. 73, Trencsenyi-Waldapfel, "Une Tragedie Grecque." Cf. Holladay, Fragments, 2:307. Jacobson, The Exagoge of Ezekiel. 28-36, argues for additional scenes such as a confrontation of Moses and Pharaoh. 74, Trencsenyi-Waldapfel, "Une Tragedie Grecque," 154-55; Kuiper ("Le poete juif," 166-67), followed by Kappelmacher ("Zur Tragodie," 82), would extend the drama to allow for the reunion of Moses and Zipporah.

228


or not the details of this reconstruction are accepted, it is clear that Moses' dream is recounted early in the drama and has a decisive role in the development of the action since it wins the support of Raguel. The function of the dream is indeed to guarantee knowledge that could not otherwise be available. The knowledge so revealed is the kingship of Moses but also, in Raguel's interpretation, the fact that Moses is endowed with all-encompassing vision. The exact significance of what is promised to Moses is disputed. Jacobson minimizes the mystical elements; the enthronement of Moses is only a dream, an imaginary event.''^ Consequently Raguel's interpretation is taken to undercut the mystical implications of the v i s i o n . V a n der Horst, in contrast, sees the dream as "nothing else than a vision of Moses' future exaltation to cosmic rulership, to be exercised from God's throne."^'' Much depends on the understanding of the "throne" to which Moses succeeds. It is hard to see, however, why Ezekiel should have introduced a dream that had no biblical basis only to undercut its implications. The cosmic dimension of Moses' rule cannot be denied. The dream is fulfilled in the story of the Exodus, where Moses leads his people out of Egypt and Pharaoh is overthrown. The tragic climax comes with the destruction of the Egyptians at the sea. Then the drama concludes with a peaceful scene at Elim. Significantly, the story is not extended to Mt. Sinai, although the giving of the law would have provided a satisfactory dramatic finale.Instead, the concluding scene is marked by the second deviation from the biblical text, the description of the phoenix. The introduction of the phoenix into the story of the Exodus is most immediately prompted by the reference to the palm trees at Elim. Since the Greek word phoenix, which means both "phoenix" and "palm tree," is used in the Septuagint, it provides the obvious point of contact. However, the phoenix (bennu) had ancient symbolic significance in Egypt, where it was associated with the creator god and the renewal of life, but also with Osiris and with the renewal of life through death.^*^ In Ezekiel's drama it is coupled 75. Jacobson, "Mysticism and Apocalyptic in Ezekiel the Tragedian," Illinois Classical Studies 6 (1981) 272-93. 76. So also Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 134, although he says that Jacobson's "minimalist interpretation is excessive." 77. Van der Horst, "Some Notes on Ezekiel the Tragedian," in idem. Essays on the Jewish World of Early Christianity, 84. 78. In view of this, Trencsenyi-Waldapfel's view, that the kingship of Moses is realized in the law, must be rejected ("Une Trag^die Grecque," 156). 79. The identification of the bird in Ezekiel as the phoenix is based on the repetition of the entire passage in Pseudo-Euslathius (PG, vol. 18, col. 729), where it is stated to be a description of the phoenix. The identification is guaranteed by the similarity to the description in Herodotus 2.73 and the obvious play on the word for "palm tree." 80. M. Walla, Der Vogel Phoenix in der antiken Literatur und in der Dichtung des Laktanz (Vienna: Notring, 1969) 1-50, esp. 16 and 30. The legend of the phoenix rising from its


229

with the biblical imagery of the twelve springs of Elim, which suggest abundance and life. This scene is presented as the report of a scout. It is not yet present, but it suggests a promised land of renewed life and possibly of immortality.^' The symbolism of the phoenix opens the possibility that the Exodus may be understood allegorlcally as a journey, not to Canaan but to eternal life, which Is completed under the guidance of Moses. Such an allegorical understanding would, of course, be in keeping with the thought of Philo some centuries later. Yet there is no explicit allegory in Ezekiel; the symbols are not interpreted. It is possible that the phoenix only symbolizes the rebirth of the Israelite people out of slavery and the vitality of the promised land of Israel.However, in view of Moses' dream-vision, which grounds Moses' authority in his supernatural knowledge, we should not exclude the possibility that a transcendent salvation is envisaged. We may now return to the theories of Cerfaux and Goodenough that Ezekiel's drama is representative of a Jewish mystery. There is no warrant for any assumption that the drama was performed in a ritual c o n t e x t . F u r ther, we cannot say that Moses' ascent had a paradigmatic significance for his followers, in the sense that Philo's Moses was paradigmatic.^* However, we have seen that there is some reason to believe that the entire story had symbolic significance and dramatized in a veiled way the process of salvation. Further, the authority of Moses, at least in the fragments we have, is related not to the law but to his ascent to the divine throne. One might, then, speak of a Jewish mystery in the extended sense that Judaism here is based on knowledge which is accessible only by revelation and on a spiritual or deeper understanding of events. Moses is the leader of such a religion because of the special knowledge given to him by God. The Judaism of Ezekiel Is different from the other fragments preserved by Alexander Polyhistor. It is not primarily a national romance — it does littie to show, in the manner of Eupolemus or Artapanus, that Israel outshines its neighbors. Again, it is not explicitly centered on the law. It is based on an acceptance of Moses as the authoritative leader because of his knowledge, but the association of Moses with the law is not noted. The own ashes is attested only in later Roman writings (Walla, Der VogeI Phoenix, 62-81). See also R. van den Broek, The Myth of the Phoenix according to Classical and Early Christian Traditions (Leiden: Brill, 1971). 81. Barclay's flat assertion that there is "no indication that the phoenix is a symbol of renewal or immortality" (Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 138) simply ignores the symbolic associations of the phoenix in antiquity. 82. So Jacobson, The Exagoge of Ezekiel, 159. 83. Wieneke (Ezechielis Iiidaci, 119) argues that the tragedy was probably never performed because there were too many changes of scene. 84. De Vita Mosis 1.158; Meeks, "Moses as God and King," 355.

230


only specific Jewish custom noted is the celebration of the Passover, and there the requirement of circumcision is omitted. Moses' dream is interpreted by a foreigner in direct reversal of the biblical custom (contrast Joseph and Daniel). The fact that Raguel gives his daughter to a stranger (Moses!) has obvious implications for marriage customs in the Diaspora. The Exodus evokes a confession from the Egyptian messenger. While Ezekiel holds to the superiority of Judaism, it is not understood as an exclusive religion. It is accessible to anyone guided by the heavenly knowledge of Moses. For want of a better label, we may call this religion the Jewish mystery, with the understanding that no ritual practice is necessarily implied.

Joseph and Aseneth Among the most intriguing documents relevant to the question of mysdc Judaism is Joseph andAseneth. The questions of date and provenance have already been discussed in Chapter 2 above. The book consists of two disdnct though related stories, the conversion of Aseneth (chaps. 1-21) and the jealousy of Pharaoh's son. The second story has also been discussed above in Chapter 2. Each story has a point of departure in scripture.^^ The first responds to the problem of Joseph's marriage to an Egyptian woman. The second, less clearly, explains how Joseph came to be ruler over all the land of Egypt (Gen. 45:26), although it goes beyond the biblical account in actually making Joseph sovereign for a dme after the pharaoh's death. This exegedcal aspect of the genesis of the story is, naturally, important; but it is by no means the only key to the meaning of the work. While the language of Joseph andAseneth is heavily dependent on the Septuagint,^^ the structure and many motifs are drawn from the Hellenlsdc romances.^'' This widely acknowledged fact has two important consequences for our understanding of Joseph andAseneth. First, despite the ubiquity of biblical phrases, we cannot

85. See R. S. Kraemer, When Asenath Met Joseph: A Late Antique Tale of the Biblical Patriarch and His Egyptian Wife (New York: Oxford, 1998) 19-49, for the use of midrashic techniques and biblical motifs. 86. M. Philonenko, Joseph et Aseneth: Introduction, Texte Critique et Notes (Studia Post-Biblica 13; Leiden: Brill, 1968), 28; G. Delling "Einwirkungen der Sprache der Septuaginta in 'Joseph und Aseneth,'" JSJ 9 (1978) 29-56. 87. Philonenko, Joseph et Aseneth. 43-48; C. Burchard, "Joseph and Aseneth," 183-85; S. West, "Joseph and Asenath: ANeglected Greek Romance," CQ 24 (1974) 70-81; R. I. Pervo, "Joseph and Aseneth and the Greek Novel," in SBL 1976 Seminar Papers (Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1976) 171-82; L. M. Wills, The Jewish Novel in the Ancient World (Ithaca, N.Y.; Cornell University Press, 1995) 170-84.


231

agree that Aseneth has a purely Jewish p r o f i l e . A t the very least, she is also a character in a Hellenistic romance. Second, while we must be skeptical of claims that the romance genre is inherently related to the mystery religions,^^ the fact remains that Aseneth's conversion to Judaism is simultaneously her romantic attraction to Joseph and climactic marriage to him.^° The homology of these two strands of the story cannot be denied. Just as the quest for philosophical truth is depicted by the analogy of love in Plato's Symposium, so the quest for religious truth is depicted here. The question of Jewish identity arises with unusual directness in the story of Aseneth's conversion. As Philonenko has outlined well, there is a fundamental antithesis between Jews and Egyptians, despite the mediating presence of sympathizers and proselytes.^' The antithesis is most clearly marked by Joseph's refusal to eat with the Egyptians and to kiss Aseneth because she worshipped idols. The prohibition of intermarriage is evidently implied in Joseph's initial rejection of Aseneth. In both the matter of table fellowship and of kissing, the decisive point is the worship of idols, for it is not fitting that a pious man who worships with his mouth the living God and eats the blessed bread of life and drinks the blessed cup of immortality and is anointed with the blessed ointment of incorruption, should kiss an alien woman, who blesses with her mouth dead, dumb idols and eats from their table bread of strangling, drinks from their libations a cup of treachery and anoints herself with the ointment of perdition. (8:5) Again in Aseneth's prayer the major fault acknowledged, before her personal sin of pride, is that of idolatry, and her mouth is defiled from eafing the sacrifices of the idols. It would seem, then, that Judaism is primarily a strict monotheism which rejects idol worship.^^ 88. Contra D. Sanger, "Bekehrung und Exodus: Zum jUdischen Traditionshintergrund von 'Joseph und Aseneth,'" JSJ 10 (1979) 11-36, esp. 31. Sanger's study is too narrowly focused on the prayer in chap. 12. 89. This claim is made esp. by R. Merkelbach, Roman und Mysterium in der Antike (Munich: Beck, 1962); also K. Kerenyi, Die griechisch-orientaltsche Romanliteratur (Tiibingen: Mohr, 1927). It has been sharply rejected by R. Turcan, "I^ roman 'initiatique': A propos d'un livre recent," RHR 163 (1963) 149-99; B. E. Perry, The Ancient Romances: A Literary-Historical Account of Their Origins (Berkeley: University of Califomia Press, 1967) 336 n. 17; also A. D. Nock, review of Kerenyi in Gnomon 4 (1928) 485-92. For a thorough critique of the alleged affinities of Joseph and Aseneth with mystery initiation rituals, see D. Sanger, Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien (WUNT 2.5; Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1980). 90. On the (sublimated) erotic aspects of the story, see Wills, The Jewish Novel, 174-75. 91. Philonenko, Joseph et Aseneth, 48. 92. R. Chesnutt, From Death to Life: Conversion in Joseph and Aseneth (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995) 171-72, notes parallels to this idea in Rabbinic Judaism: "For anyone who repudiates idolatry is called 'a Jew'" {b. Megillah 13a).

232


The sharp antithesis between Jews and Egyptians is mediated by the presence of sympathizers and proselytes. Pentephres, father of Aseneth, and Pharaoh are both sympathizers in the sense that they are well disposed to Joseph and his religion.They are not necessarily "God-fearers" in any technical sense, although they respect the God of Joseph, as there is nothing to indicate that they follow any Jewish laws. Their sympathy for Judaism does not exempt them from Joseph's separation in table fellowship, as they still worship the gods of the Egyptians. Aseneth, by contrast, definitively breaks with her ancestral religion and becomes a proselyte. Thereafter, she, like Joseph, can claim Jacob as father (22:3), Once she has rejected the idols of the Egyptians, the impediments to her union with Joseph are overcome. The conversion of Aseneth involves none of the rituals later associated with proselytism — circumcision, baptism, or the offering of a sacrifice in the temple.^* Circumcision was not relevant in the case of Aseneth, but we have noted its near absence in the literature of the Hellenistic Diaspora. Sacrifice in the Jerusalem temple was, again, scarcely relevant in a Diaspora setting, especially in view of the fictional setting of the story before the time of Solomon. Proselyte baptism is never attested in Hellenistic Judaism.^^ The question then arises whether conversion to Judaism was simply conceived as the repudiation of idolatry or whether it still involved some ritual elements.

Ritual Elements in Joseph and Aseneth? The question of ritual is raised by two passages in Joseph andAseneth. The first is the formulaic reference to eating the bread of life, drinking the cup of immortality, and anointing with the oil of incorruption, which occurs In 8:56, 15:4, and 16:16 (cf. 19:5; 21:21). The second is the mysterious honeycomb in chapters 16-17. The formulaic character of the references to the bread, wine, and oil has been taken by some as sufficient evidence that they refer to a r i t u a l . Y e t , attempts to elucidate the references by analogies with the Christian Eucharist, the Qumran meal, or the meal of the Therapeutae have been unsuccessful.^^ The inclusion of the anointing is problematic since 93. Philonenko {Joseph et Aseneth, 51) regards Pentephres and Pharaoh as sympathizers. 94. G. F. Moore, Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era: The Age of the Tannaim (3 vols.; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1927-30) 1:331. See Chesnutt, From Death to Life, 155-65. 95. Sib. OK 4:165 is often regarded as a reference, but incorrectly so. 96. Philonenko, Joseph et Asineth, 91. 97. Ibid., 91-92. See further G. D. Kilpatrick, "The Last Supper," ETM (1952/53) 4-8; J. Jeremias, "The Last Supper," £ 7 6 4 (1952/53) 91-92; K. G. Kuhn, "The Lord's Supper and the Eschatological Meal at Qumran," in K. Stendhal, ed.. The Scrolls and the New Testament (New York: Harper, 1957) 65-93. Kuhn defends a relation with Qumran.


233

it seems to come after the blessing of the bread and the wine.^^ Consequently, Philonenko is forced to posit a ritual which has no exact parallel in ancient Judaism, but which he then relates to initiation into Judaism as a mystery.^^ Burchard, by contrast, abandons the idea of a ritual meal and suggests that the formula refers to the entire Jewish way of life.'^'' The context in which the formula is first introduced in chapter 8 is significant at this point. Joseph explains his rejection of Aseneth by reference to their respective food, drink, and ointment. Since the eating, drinking, and anointing are predicated of Joseph as a pious man, they are evidently not, or at least not only, elements of an initiation ritual. Rather, they are the habitual practice of the pious. The possibility remains that the formula refers to a recurring ritual practice. There is an inescapable analogy with 1 Corinthians: "are not those who eat the sacrifices partakers in the altar. . . . you cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons; you cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons" (1 Cor. 10:18, 20-21). The table of the Lord for Paul is, of course, the Eucharist. Joseph and Aseneth does not refer to the table of the Lord, but the contrast with the table of idols suggests that a cultic meal is involved. However, there is no known example of a ritual meal in which anointing comes after the bread and the cup. It is possible that Joseph and Aseneth is the unique witness to such a ritual, but it is also possible that the formula doesn't reflect a ritual, but is rather, like the Old Testament formula "the grain, the wine and the oil,"^*'^ a summary of the staples of life. Even in this case, special significance is attached to eating, drinking, and anointing as the representative actions. Joseph's separatism in table fellowship lends support to the idea that meals have a special significance. The formula in Joseph and Aseneth gives a sacramental significance to eating, drinking, and anointing in any Jewish meal where a blessing is p r o n o u n c e d . T h e use of oil for cleaning the hands at the end of a meal is attested, though not widely, in Rabbinic Judaism, so the anointing has at least possible significance in this context.^"** In all, then, Joseph and Aseneth does not provide adequate reason for positing an otherwise unknown mystic ritual, since the formulaic language can be referred to the everyday rituals of Jewish life.

98. T. Levi 8:4-5 mentions bread, wine, and anointing, among other elements, in the investiture of Levi, but the anointing comes before the bread and wine. 99. Philonenko, Joseph et Aseneth, 93, 100. C. Burchard, Untersuchungen zu Joseph und Aseneth (WUNT 8; Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1965) 126-33. 101. So also Chesnutt, From Death to Life. 130. 102. Hosea2:8,22. See further Burchard, Untersuchungen zu Joseph und Aseneth, 128-29. 103. See already Jeremias, 'The Last Supper," 91-92. 104. So b. Beralihot 53b; 42a; 43b; Burchard, Untersuchungen zu Joseph und Aseneth, 128; Philonenko, Joseph et Aseneth, 93.

234


Group Membership The bread, the wine, and the oil are presented in Joseph andAseneth as symbols of immortality and incorrupdon. Participadon in the rituals of Jewish life, however understood, is the key to salvadon, which is immortality. Table fellowship and group membership are of the utmost importance here. A pious man may embrace his mother, his sister from the same tribe, and his wife, who bless with their mouth the living God. E. P. Sanders concludes that "outside of Judaism there is no salvadon.""'^ Yet it is important to note how the group membership is defined. The basic requirement is acknowledgment of the living God, not ethnic descent. In the idiom of the story, one may marry into the family of Jacob, provided that one rejects the idols of the Egyptians. The second story, in Joseph andAseneth 22-29, shows that ethnic membership does not guarantee right conduct. Further, it is not clear that observance of the full Jewish law is required. In practice, the law Is reduced to monotheism, rejection of idolatry, chastity before marriage, and avoidance of social or sexual intimacy with "aliens" — that is, people who worship other gods. It is noteworthy that even before her conversion Aseneth is devoted to chastity and shuns aliens. It would seem that the author regards "ethnic purity" as a virtue in its own right even when practiced by an Egyptian, except that Joseph and his family transcend the usual distinctions of race and are defined rather by worship of the true God. In short, true religion is equated with worship of the living God and avoidance of idols. This confers the right to table fellowship and group membership with Joseph and his family, and also the ultimate salvation of immortality. In 13:10 Aseneth confesses that she had not known that Joseph was God's son, for she had been told that he was the son of a shepherd from Canaan. Jacob's significance is not his ethnic origin. Aseneth feels kinship with Joseph's kin because Joseph is a son of God. The traditional criteria for Jewish identity, descent or circumcision (which is here conveniently avoided because of Aseneth's sex), are no longer decisive. The label Judaism is not in use. While the religion of Joseph and Aseneth preserves sharp boundaries over against polytheism, these boundaries are not identical with the boundaries of ethnic descent. ^"^^

105. E. p. Sanders, "The Covenant as a Soteriological Category and the Nature of Salvation in Palestinian and Hellenistic Judaism," in R. Hamerton-Kelly and R. Scroggs, eds., Jews, Greeks, and Christians: Religious Cultures in Late Antiquity: Essays in Honor of W. D. Davies (Leiden: Brill, 1976) 23. 106. This point is not negated by the persistence of ethnic pride in such matters as the beauty of the Hebrew matriarchs (1:5), pace Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 214.


235

The Episode of the Honeycomb We have argued that the bread, eup, and anointing refer to the ongoing life of the "pious" rather than to an initiation ritual. In fact, Aseneth's conversion is not marked by a ritual meal. Instead, it involves an encounter with "a man from heaven"^*"^ and a honeycomb. The man tells her that the mysteries of God {ta aporreta tou theou, 16:7) have been revealed to her. Those who turn to the Lord in metanoia will eat from this honeycomb, for it is made by the bees in paradise; the angels of God eat from it, and whoever eats from it will never die. Then the man eats some of the honey and gives some to Aseneth. The symboUsm of the honey is not entirely clear. Philonenko relates it to the manna, which tasted like honey (Exod. 16:31).^"^ It may also be associated with the goddess Neith, whose symbols included the bee.^''^ Its significance in its present context is quite explicit: it is the food of the angels which gives immortality. Philonenko and Burchard rightly interpret this as the revelation of the true significance of the bread, wine, and oil which Aseneth will share after her conversion."" The episode with the honey shows that the food of the pious is really the food of angels. Therein lies the mystery. This food confers immortality like the bread from heaven in John 6. Such food imagery is often used to symboUze wisdom."^ In Joseph and Aseneth the revealed understanding lies not only in the knowledge that those who convert in metanoia will never die, but also In the true significance of "the bread of blessing and cup of immortality." The salvation attained by Aseneth is immortaUty. The full realization of this salvation is presumably still future, but it has a strong present compo107. Philonenko {Joseph et Aseneth, 97) relates this figure to the daimon paredros of the magical papyri. The more obvious parallels are with the ubiquitous angelophanies of the Jewish literature of this period, but the fact that the angel shares heavenly food with Aseneth is exceptional in the Jewish literature. E. M. Humphrey, The Ladies and the Cities: Transformation and Apocalyptic Identity in Joseph and Aseneth, 4 Ezra, the Apocalypse, and The Shepherd of Hernias (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995) 30-56, regards chaps. 14-17 as an apocalypse. For parallels with magical and mystical literature, see further Kraemer, When Aseneth Met Joseph, 89-154. 108. Philonenko, Joseph et Asineth, 96. So also Burchard, Untersuchungen zu Joseph und Aseneth, 130. See also Philonenko, "Initiation et Mystfere dans Joseph et Aseneth," in C. J. Bleeker, ed.. Initiation (NumenSup 10; Leiden: Brill, 1965) 147-53. Kraemer, When Aseneth Met Joseph, 169, tries to explain the bees and honey as Neoplatonist symbolism. G. Bohak, Joseph and Aseneth and the Jewish Temple in Heliopolis (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1996) 8-14, takes the bees as allegorical representation of priests. 109. Philonenko, Joseph et Asdneth, 65-66. 110. Philonenko, Joseph et Aseneth, 96; Burchard, Untersuchungen zu Joseph und Aseneth, 129. 111. E.g., Sirach 24:19-22 (wisdom's inheritance is sweeter than the honeycomb); Prov. 9:2-5 ("eat of my bread, drink of the wine I have mixed"). Note that in Burchard's reconstruction of the text of Aseneth's prayer she thanks God for giving her the bread of life and the cup of wisdom. Burchard, Untersuchungen zu Joseph und Aseneth, 86, 90.

236


nent. Joseph is already a "son of God" and Aseneth now becomes a "daughter of God" (21:3). The similarity in appearance between Joseph and the angel (14:8), and the knowledge that the pious share the food of angels, indicates that those who worship the living God are already living an angelic life. This concepdon is strikingly similar to what we find in the Qumran HodayoO^^ The assertion that those who eat of the honeycomb will never die is reminiscent of the Wisdom of Solomon (3:2), where the righteous only seem to die. The mysteries of God In Joseph andAseneth are the way to immortality, as also in the Wisdom of Solomon. Just as Joseph is a "son of God" and resembles the angel In appearance, so also the righteous man in the Wisdom of Solomon Is a son of God (2:13, 16, 18) and is numbered among the holy ones (5:5). The symbolism of the honeycomb in Joseph and Aseneth recalls the symbolism of wisdom, which is sweeter than the honeycomb (Sirach 24:20), and suggests that the transformation to the quasi-angelic state is due to the nourishment of wisdom. The main difference between Joseph and Aseneth and the Wisdom of Solomon is that the latter uses a philosophical idiom while Joseph and Aseneth relies on narrative symbolism.

The Representative Roles of Joseph and Aseneth Joseph and Aseneth has an evident allegorical quality which has repeatedly been noted by scholars. The attempts to construe the work as a specifically Christian allegory, taking Joseph as Christ, have been rightly r e j e c t e d . Y e t , Joseph has an obvious representative role as the embodiment of the true (Jewish) religion, who is uncompromising on the matter of idolatry but is in all respects virtuous, admired by the leading men of Egypt, and desired by the women. The representative role of Aseneth is more explicitly stated In 15:6, where she is told that in the future she will be called city of refuge, that many nations will take refuge in her, and that those who attach themselves to the Lord through repentance will be protected by her "wall.""* This passage applies to Aseneth a constellation of biblical prophecies — those to Abraham in Genesis, and to Zion in Zech. 2:15 (LXX) and Isa. 62:4. Burchard concludes that Aseneth is "das Zion der Proselyten," although he insists that she is not an allegory for the proselytes.''^ Burchard is quite right that Aseneth

112. See H. W. Kuhn, Enderwarlung und Gegenwdrtiges Heil (SUNT 4; Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966); G. W. E. Nickelsburg, Resurrection. Immortality, and Eternal Life in Intertestamental Judaism (HTS 26; Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1972) 146-56. 113. See Burchard, Vntersuchungen zu Joseph und Aseneth, 112-17. 114. On the transformation of Aseneth, see Humphrey, The Ladies and the Cities, 51-53. 115. Burchard, Untersuchungen zu Joseph und Aseneth, 119.


237

does not lose her own individuality in the story to beeome a mere cipher, but she is, nonetheless, the representative proselyte. By illustrating a model proselyte experience, she becomes a paradigm for proselytes who can take hope and reassurance from her story.

A Corpus Permixtum The conversion of Aseneth is described throughout in strongly biblical terms, which invoke the language of creation, emergence from darkness to light, and from death to life (10:18-20; 12:2-3).''^ Dieter Sanger has argued that it is an actualization of the Exodus, but his argument rests on the presumed technical sense of the verb exagein}^^ A Jewish reader might well correlate the exodus of Aseneth from idolatry with that of Israel from Egypt, but the correlation is not highlighted in the text. Rather, the main biblical analogies are with the process of creation — evidently a more immediately acceptable conception in an Egyptian context. Nonetheless, the conversion of Aseneth is an exodus of sorts, not only spiritually by the repudiation of idolatry but also socially, by her transition from the community of the Egyptians to that of the Hebrews. The transition is completed in chapter 22 when she goes to see Jacob, greets him as a father, and is accepted as a daughter. Her relationship with her own parents is more ambiguous. In her prayer in chapters 12-13, she proclaims herself desolate "because my father and my mother disowned me and said, 'Aseneth is not our daughter,' because I have destroyed and ground (to pieces) their gods, and have come to hate them" (12:11). Hence she is an orphan. In the narrative, however, her parents are very far from disowning her. Even before she has laid eyes on Joseph, her father Pentephres proposes to give her to him in marriage, since "Joseph is a man powerful in wisdom and experience, and the spirit of God is upon him, and 116. U. Fischer, Eschatologie und Jetiseitserwartung im Hellenistischen Diasporajudentum (BZNW 44; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1978) 115-23, argues that Aseneth is identified with the heavenly Jerusalem. The argument is based on parallels with 4 Ezra 9:38-10:56 and esp. Revelation 21, and on the imagery of walls and foundations (some of which is poorly attested textually; see Fischer, 118). It is true that the salvation which Aseneth attains is heavenly, but it is significant that there is no explicit reference to Jerusalem. The Zion/Jerusalem imagery, both earthly and heavenly, is transferred to Aseneth. She represents a form of salvation which replaces that traditionally associated with Jerusalem. So the traditional imagery lacks the specific concrete reference to Jerusalem which Fischer posits. 117. Chesnutt, From Death to Life, 172-76. 118. Sanger, "Bekehrung und Exodus," 26. Sanger argues that 12:1-2, the beginning of Aseneth's psalm, is a Lobpsalm and that the Lobpsaltn is often used with reference to the Exodus. It does not, however, follow that the imagery necessarily implies a reference to the Exodus here.

238


the grace of the Lord is with him" (L9). After Aseneth's conversion, Pentephres is similarly eager, and the Pharaoh also "rejoiced with great joy." In view of this happy conclusion, it makes little sense to speak of "cultural antagonism" in Joseph and Aseneth.^^^ Jews and Egyptians are not undifferentiated wholes. There is indeed antagonism between Pharaoh's son and some of Joseph's brothers, in the story in chapters 23-29, but even this antagonism is overcome. The only consistent antagonism in Joseph and Aseneth is directed towards idolatry. Howard Kee has rightly insisted that the book has "an open attitude toward Gentiles."'^*' It affirms not only the acceptability of converts but the possibility of intermarriage.^^' To be sure, intermarriage is only acceptable on condition of conversion. There is no compromise on the matter of idolatry. But the story expresses confidence (whether historically warranted or not) that Gentiles, even Egyptians, are capable of such conversion. Joseph andAseneth can scarcely be described as missionary literature. Its main readership was most probably Jewish. Only Jews would have fully appreciated the biblical allusions that run throughout. But the story is surely also meant to encourage proselytes, both those who have not yet converted and those who have. It is addressed to all interested parties, both Jewish and Gentile. It affirms the superiority of Judaism as a monotheistic religion, but not necessarily that of all ethnic Jews. In die phrase of Dieter Sanger, Judaism is recognized as a corpuspermixtum.^^^ Adherence to monotheism and spiritual purity are prized more than ethnic descent.

Lack of Sectarian Character A final question concerns the precise milieu within Judaism In which Joseph andAseneth was composed. The mystical character of the work has led many scholars to posit a sectarian origin. The hypotheses of Essene or Therapeutae authorship have been widely rejected because of the lack of correspondence on points of central importance. Philonenko's hypothesis of an unknown mystic sect rests on the assumption that a peculiar ritual is attested in Joseph 119. Pace Barclay, Jews in th6 Mediterranean Diaspora, 204-16. 120. H. C. Kee, "The Socio-Religious Setting and Aims of 'Joseph and Aseneth,'" in SBL 1976 Seminar Papers (Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1976) 183-92. 121. Barclay nonetheless finds "an evident concern to discourage exogamy" in this story of the marriage of an Israelite and an Egyptian (Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 215)! 122. Sanger, "Bekehrung und Exodus," 35. 123. Joseph and Aseneth has been attributed to the Therapeutae by M. Delcor, "Un roman d'amour d'origine therapeute: Le Livre de Joseph et Aseneth," Bulletin de Litterature Ecclesiastique 63 (1962) 3-27. See Burchard, Untersuchungen zu Joseph und Aseneth, 107-12; Philonenko, Joseph et Aseneth, 102-8; Kee, "The Socio-Religious Setting," 183-92.


239

and Aseneth, which we have seen reason to d o u b t . I n fact, Joseph and Aseneth gives no more impression of sectarian provenance than does Philo. The strong interest in the conversion of Gentiles, but not of Jews, and the lack of distinctive laws apart from table fellowship weigh against a sectarian origin. To be sure, not all Jews would have shared the mystical view of Judaism embodied in this work, but it does not posit any significant division within the Jewish community.

The Prayer of Joseph Joseph and Aseneth is restrained in its allusions to the heavenly or spiritual world. The "man from heaven" in chapters 14-17 is exceptional in the story and is also deliberately mysterious. Other documents of Hellenistic Judaism are more explicitly mythological. One of the most intriguing of such documents is the fragmentary Prayer of JosephM^ The central point in the main surviving fragment of the Prayer of Joseph is that Israel is an angel of God: I, Jacob, who am speaking to you, am also Israel, an angel of God and a ruling spirit. Abraham and Isaac were created before any work. But I, Jacob, whom men call Jacob but whose name is Israel, am he whom God called Israel, i.e., a man seeing God, because I am the firstborn of every living thing to whom God gives light. (Fragment 1) Jacob goes on to interpret the struggle with the angel of Genesis 32 as a conflict with Uriel, who told him "that I had descended to earth and I had tabernacled among men and that I had been called by the name Jacob." Uriel envied Israel and disputed his rank, but "I told him his name, and what rank he held among the sons of God: 'Are you not Uriel, the eighth after me, and I, Israel, the archangel of the power of the Lord and the chief captain among the sons of God?" The paraphrase in Philocalia 23.19 says that Israel recognizes his true identity while doing service in the body, being reminded of it by the archangel Uriel. We do not know the full extent of the Prayer of Joseph. The second 124. Philonenko, Joseph et Aseneth, 105. H. C. Kee, "The Socio-Cultural Setting of Joseph and Aseneth," NTS 29 (1983) 394-413, ascribes the text to "an esoteric group of uppermiddle class Jews and converts." 125. J. Z. Smith, "The Prayer of Joseph," in J. Neusner, ed., Religions in Antiquity: Essays in Memory of E. R. Goodenough (Leiden: Brill, 1968) 253-94; idem, "The Prayer of Joseph," in 077^ 2:699-714. There are two fragments preserved by Origen, Commentary on John 2.31 (Fragment 1) and Philocalia 23.15 (Fragment 2). There is also a quotation from the second fragment and a paraphrase of the first in Philocalia 23.19.

240


fragment would seem to indicate that the book had an apocalypdc component: "For I have read in the tablets of heaven all that shall befall you and your sons." Further, it is questionable whether Origen's paraphrase in the Philocalia accurately reflects his source when he suggests that Israel was unaware of his heavenly origin until he was reminded of it by Uriel. In view of the brevity of the surviving fragments, any interpretation must be tentative. J. Z. Smith has proposed on the basis of religio-historical parallels that "the myth may be ritually appropriated by Its believers, that the 'objective' narrative has a 'subjective' correlative. That which is accomplished by the paradigmatic figure of the Patriarch Jacob-Israel may, presumably, also be achieved by the 'sons of Jacob'" by a mystical ascent to the vision of God.'^^ He finds confirmation of this in the Prayer of Jacob, which prays: "Fill my heart with good things. Master, because I am an angel on earth, because I have become immortal, because I have received the gift from thee"'^^ and in 2 Enoch, where Enoch returns to earth after he has ascended to heaven and become an angel. The case of Israel is especially important because of the natural paradigmatic extension of the role of Israel to the people of Israel. What, then, does the Prayer of Joseph say about Jewish identity? While any conclusion is tentative, it would appear that the true Israelite is an embodiment or representative of the angelic Israel, whose true rank and destiny are in heavenly glory. This is not to say that every Israelite is a preexistent angel, but that he participates in Jacob In the way that the righteous man participates in wisdom when she "tabernacles among men" (Sirach 24:8-12). The "sons of Israel" in this mystical sense are not necessarily identical with the sons of Israel according to the flesh, but the Prayer of Joseph is too fragmentary to permit us to elaborate on their identity. The conceptions of the Prayer of Joseph are remarkable but have enough in common with those of Philo and other documents from the turn of the era to support Smith's thesis that the work Is indeed a product of Hellenistic Judaism.

The Testament of Job The supernatural world is also given explicit mythological expression in the Testament of Job. There is now general agreement that this work was com126. Smith, "The Prayer of Joseph," in Neusner, ed., Religions in Antiquity, 288. 127. Ibid., 290. The Prayer of Jacob is found in Berlin P gr. 13895; available in Preisendanz, PGM, 2:148-49. See also Goodenough, Jewish Symbols, 2:203. 128. For text and translation, see R. A. Kraft, The Testament of Job {Texts and Translations 5; Pseudepigrapha Series 5, Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1974). See also R. P. Spittler, "Testament of Job," in OTP 1:829-68; R. Thornhili, "The Testament of Job," in


241

posed in Greek, as is evident from the use of the Septuagint.'^^ The Egyptian provenance can scarcely be doubted, since Job is said to be king of all Egypt (28:8).^^" The Jewish origin of the work is now generally granted in view of the lack of specifically Christian e l e m e n t s , b u t Spittler argues that chapters 46-53 (about Job's daughters) were added by a Montanist in the late second century C.E.'^-^ There is little agreement about the date. A terminus a quo of about 100 B.C.E. is suggested by dependence on LXX Job, but a terminus ad quem is difficult to find. General similarity to such works as Joseph and Aseneth and the Testament of Abraham support the common view that the work was composed in the broad period between 100 B.C.E. and 150 C.E., but a precise dating is not possible.^^^ The Testament of Job is a retelling of the story of Job but involves considerable development over and above the biblical text.^^^ The story is presented as the deathbed discourse of Job to his c h i l d r e n . M o s t significant is the new understanding of Job's sufferings. Satan is no longer a neutral figure, as in the biblical book of Job, but a prince of evil whom Job has infuriated. Moreover, Job is aware from the outset of the reason for his suffering. H. F. D. sparks, ed., The Apocryphal Old Testament (Oxford: Clarendon, 1984) 617-48. For the history of interpretation, see R. P. Spittler, 'The Testament of Job: A History of Research and Interpretation," in M. A. Knibb and P. W. van der Horst, eds.. Studies on the Testament of Job (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989) 7-32. 129. B. Schaller, Das Testament Hiobs (JSHRZ 3.3; Gutersloh: Mohn, 1979) 307. 130. The hesitation of Schaller (Das Testament Hiobs, 311) seems unwanranted. Goodman, in Schiirer, The History of the Jewish People, 3.1:553, grants that this datum favors Egyptian provenance but does not regard it as decisive. 131. Schaller, Das Testament Hiobs, 311, with references to the earlier debate. M. R. James regarded the Testament of Job as the work of a Jewish Christian {Apocrypha Anecdota 2 [Texts and Studies 5.1; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1897]). /'^ 132. Spittler, "Testament of Job," 834. See the incisive critique of this position by P. W. van der Horst, "Images of Women in the Testament of Job," in Knibb and van der Horst, eds.. Studies on the Testament of Job, 108-9. (Van der Horst's essay is reprinted in his Essays on the Jewish World of Early Christianity, 94-110. The original publication is cited here). 133. M. Delcor ("Le Testament de Job, la priere de Nabonide et les traditions targoumiques," in S. Wagner, ed., Bibel und Qumran [Berlin: Evangelische Hauptbibelgesellschaft, 1968] 72-73), argued for a date about 40 B . C . E . , taking the "king of the Persians" in 17:1 as a reference to Pacorus, but the negative connotations of this title were traditional in Egypt. See J. J. Collins, "Structure and Meaning in the Testament of Job," in SBL 1974 Seminar Papers (Cambridge, Mass.: Society of Biblical Literature, 1974) 1:50. Schaller prefers a date in the early second century c . E . 134. Hence the common but loose designation "midrash"; see, e.g., K. Kohier, 'The Testament of Job: An Essene Midrash on the Book of Job," in G. A. Kohut, ed., Semitic Studies in Memory of A. Kohut (Berlin: Calvary, 1897) 264-338; D. RahnenfUhrer, "Des Testament Hiobs und das NT," ZNW 62 (1971) 68-69. 135. On the testament form in the Testament of Job, see Collins, "Structure and Meaning," 37-39; idem, "Testaments," in M. E. Stone, ed., Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period (CRINT 2.2; Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984) 349-54; E. von Nordheim, Die Lehre der Alten: Das Testament als Gliedgattung im Judentum der HellenistischRomischen Zeit (2 vols.; Leiden: Brill, 1980) 1:119-35.

242


The Struggle with Satan Like Joseph and Aseneth, the Testament of Job involves a conversion to the worship of the one true God. Job, called Jobab, used to live near a venerated idol and had come to question whether this was the God who made heaven and e a r t h . O n e night "a voice in a great light" informed him that the idol was not God but the "power of the devil by which human nature is deceived." Job immediately asks for authority to raze the shrine, but he is warned: If you attempt to destroy and you destroy the place of Satan he will angrily rise up against you for battle except that he will not be able to bring death upon you. . . . But if you endure, I shall make your name renowned in all earthly generations until the consummation of the age. And you will be raised up in the resurrection and you will be like an athlete who spars and endures hard labors and wins the crown [4:4-9].'^'' Job proceeds to raze the temple anyhow, and so the drama of Job's suffering is set in motion. The introductory story of Job's conversion in chapters 2-5 provides the framework for the rest of the book and points clearly to one aspect of the book's message. Job is an exemplary athlete of virtue who wins a crown by endurance. This motif is a common one in Hellenistic J u d a i s m . W e have seen in Chapter 4 above that the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs typically inculcate specific virtues. The virtue of endurance Is highlighted in the first part of the book (chaps. 2-27), where Job is directly involved in conflict with Satan. In 1:3 Job introduces himself as one who exhibits complete endurance. Again in chapter 27 Satan repeats the athletic image in acknowledging his defeat by Job. Job draws the moral in 27:10 by exhorting his children to padence. However, endurance is not an end in itself. Job describes himself in 18:67 as a merchant at sea who is prepared to lose all he has if only he can reach a certain city and share in its riches. So, says Job, "I also now considered my possessions as nothing compared to approaching the city about which the angel had spoken to me." In fact, the angel had not told Job of a city but had promised 136. Cf. the conversion of Abraham in Jubilees 12:12 and in the Apocalypse of Abraham. 137. The resurrection of Job is found already in LXX Job 42:17a. 138. V. C. Pfitzner, Paul and the Agon Mon/(Leiden: Brill, 1967) 38-72. See also I. Jacobs, "Literary Motifs in the Testament of Job," JJS 21 (1970) 1-3; C. Haas, "Job's Perseverance in the Testament of Job," in Knibb and van der Horst, eds., Studies on the Testament of Job, 117-54.


243

retribution, fame, and a share in the resurrection, all of which are given to Job in the Septuagint. The author of the Testament of Job feels free to substitute the heavenly Jerusalem for these more traditional rewards. It is clear from chapter 18 that Job's endurance is based on the knowledge, imparted to him by the angel, of the future hope and heavenly reality of the "city." The athletic metaphor for the conflict between Job and Satan refers, on a deeper level, to the conflict between revealed knowledge and Satanic deception, which was already implied in the initial situation. So Satan repeatedly takes on disguises in an effort to deceive Job, first as a beggar (chap. 7), then as king of the Persians (chap. 17), then as a great storm (20:5), and finally as a seller of bread (chap. 23). Job is able to penetrate the disguises. His knowledge gives rise to endurance and so he triumphs.

The Confrontation with the Friends The second part of the Testament of Job (chaps. 2 8 ^ 4 ) describes Job's confrontation with his friends (which makes up nearly all the biblical book). The (nonbiblical) lament of the kings for Job (chap. 32) introduces the major motif of the second half of the book by its refrain: "where now is the glory of your throne?" Job replies that his throne and his glory are in heaven and that earthly kings and their glory will pass away. We have, then, a twofold contrast. First, there is a contrast between Job's misery and his former prosperity; second, between the fragility of the earthly kingdom and the heavenly throne. The real issue between Job and his friends is awareness of heavenly reality. Job has insight into heavenly things while the friends do not. This point is well illustrated by the extraordinary exchange between Baldad and Job In chapters 35-38. Job's assertion that he has a throne in heaven raises a very natural problem for Baldad. Has Job, as a result of his prolonged suffering, gone mad? The response to his first question must have increased his doubt — Job says that his heart (mind) is not on earth but in heaven. This prompts Baldad to ask hirh about heavenly realities. Why does this God in whom Job trusts allow a faithful servant to suffer? And how does the sun which sets in the west proceed to rise in the east again? The correlation between the two questions is not immediately evident. Baldad might be thought to have answered his own first question. However, in both questions Baldad is challenging Job's claim to know heavenly realities. His remarks on the impossibiUty of judging the ways of God indicate his own belief that heavenly knowledge is impossible. Job's reply seems to imply that he agrees with Baldad, but is ironic. He by no means retracts his claim to heavenly knowledge, but that knowledge Is not natural to man. It re-

244


quires special revelation and Is certainly not accessible to one so earthly minded as Baldad. Job proceeds to reaffirm his knowledge of heavenly realities with another vision in chapter 40. Elihu, in chapter 41, goes beyond the others in seeking to expose Job's "nonexistent portion." He is said to be "filled with Satan." The struggle is still between Job and Satan, and the issue is faith in the heavenly reward of Job. Job's confrontation with his friends is resolved by the theophany, which is dealt with very briefly here. The three friends are reconciled to God through the mediation of Job. This is in accordance with the biblical story, but it now carries the implication that those who lack heavenly revelation depend on the intercession of those who enjoy it. Elihu, however, as the representative of Satan, is condemned to permanent destruction. His fate Is spelled out in a hymn on the lips of Eliphaz in chapter 43. Elihu now becomes the counterpart of Job. Even as Job is restored, Elihu's "kingdom has passed away, his throne has decayed, and the honor of his pretense is in Hades" (43:5).

The Role of the Women Job's insight into heavenly realides is shown also through a series of contrasts with women. In chapter 7, Job's servant fails to recognize Satan and thereby highlights Job's ability to recognize him. In chapters 24-26, Job's wife, who has given the hair of her head to buy food for Job, fails to see the Devil standing behind her undl Job calls him forth. In chapter 39, Job's wife again shows her lack of Insight by asking the kings to recover the bones of her children. Job opposes her, saying that the children have been taken up to heaven. Both his wife and the kings then see the children in heaven. The women are not evil. Like the three kings, but not Elihu, they are victims rather than agents of deception. Neither Job's wife nor his servant definitively transcends the state of deception (although Job's wife sees her children in heaven and then dies In peace). After the theophany, however, we find a remarkable account of the inheritance of Job's daughters (chaps. 46-50). The daughters are given the bands which God gave to Job when he bade him gird up his loins like a man. When they gird themselves, their hearts are changed so that they no longer think earthly thoughts but speak the language of the angels. Further, their inheritance causes them to "live in heaven" (47:3). In the Testament of Job, womankind symbolizes, like the three kings, the human state of ignorance,^^^ which is transformed at the end through the media-

139. The portrayal of women in the Testament of Job as lacking heavenly insight is in accordance with Philo's use of female imagery for the irrational soul. See R. A. Baer, Philo's


245

tion of Job into heavenly knowledge and heavenly life. Job's own soul is carried up to heaven on a chariot at the end.^'*''

The Religion of the Testament of Job Salvation for the Testament of Job is immortality in heaven, and it is attained through endurance, which is made possible by heavenly knowledge such as is given to Job. Since this knowledge is not generally accessible, it is in effect a mystery. The Testament of Job does contain some advice that is not mysterious. The account of Job's good deeds in chapters 9-15 is evidently exemplary. The main emphasis falls on generosity to the poor. The endurance and patience of Job are also exemplary. Finally, in chapter 45, Job exhorts his children before his death: Above all, do not forget the Lord. Do good to the poor; do not overlook the helpless. Do not take wives for yourselves from foreigners. Apart from devotion to God and the general attitude of generosity to the poor, the only specific conduct prescribed in the Testament of Job is the avoidance of intermarriage. The lack of more specific instructions is all the more noteworthy since Job is presented as a Gentile king who is converted to the worship of the true God. There is no ritual of conversion and no reference to circumcision. Job is never called an Israelite or a Jew, and such a designation would be implausible for a ruler of Egypt. What, then. Is the group identity protected by the prohibition of intermarriage? It would appear to be the fellowship of those who worship the true God. Ethnic considerations are less prominent in the Testament of Job than in Joseph and Aseneth. It is not clear that the Testament of Job distinguishes between Jews and God-fearers, provided that the Use of the Categories Male and Female (Leiden: Brill, 1970) 40-53; also D. Sly. Philo's Perception of Women (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990). 140. Van der Horst. "Images of Women." 104, argues that there is a marked difference between the portrayal of the daughters and that of Job's wife and servant, since they do not obtain lasting insight. He regards chapters 46-53 as an appendage. See, however, the rejoinder of S. R. Garrett, "The 'Weaker Sex' in the Testament of Job," JBL 112 (1993) 55-70. who argues that the view of women is coherent throughout and defends the unity of the work. Job's second set of daughters are exempt from the feminine preoccupation with earthly affairs only because they have been given changed hearts. 141. The affinities of the Testament of Job with merkabah mysticism are emphasized by H. C. Kee, "Satan. Magic, and Salvation in the Testament of Job," in SBL 1974 Seminar Papers (Cambridge, Mass.: Society of Biblical Literature, 1974) 1:53-76, but, as van der Horst remarks, "the element of 'throne-vision' does not at all play a prominent role in T. Job" ("Images of Women," 112).

246


latter unambiguously reject idolatry. The basis of the religion is not the Mosaic law'*^ but the heavenly revelations and the rejection of idolatry. Nonetheless, the prohibition of intermarriage shows that the social reality of the Jewish community was important to the author. In this respect the author was no different from Philo, who held that the pursuit of spiritual reality should not lead to the neglect of the literal commandments. Philonenko has suggested that the Testament of Job originated in a community of Therapeutae.'*^ The prominence of hymns might be thought to accord with the singing of the Therapeutae and the ecstatic speech of Job's daughters with the inclusion of women in the choirs (Vita Contemplativa 80). Neither of these points of contact is unambiguous, however, and there is no parallel in the Testament of Job for the meal of the Therapeutae or indeed for their contemplative life."** Given the paucity of our information on the Therapeutae, there is not sufficient evidence to attribute the Testament of Job to that group. Despite the emphasis on mysteries and revealed knowledge, there is no evidence that the Testament of Job originated in a sectarian context.

T h e B o o k s of A d a m and E v e Closely related to the Testament of Job are the Apocalypse of Moses and the Life of Adam and Eve, two recensions of the story of Adam and Eve which overlap in about half their material. '*^ The shorter of these, the Apocalypse of 142. In this respect the affinities with the apocalypses are noteworthy, especially since the knowledge given to Job is in large part eschatological. 143. M. Philonenko, "Le Testament de Job et les Therapeutes," Semitica 8 (1958) 41-53; idem, "Le Testament de Job," Semitica 18 (1968) 9-24. So also Spittler, 'Testament of Job," 834. Spittler suggests a possible Montanist redaction in view of the ecstatic behavior of Job's daughters, but this is unnecessary. 144. See the sharp critique of the Therapeutae hypothesis by Schaller, Das Testament Hiobs, 309-11; also the critique of van der Horst, "Images of Women," 115. Van der Horst suggests that chapters 46-53 adapted a haggadah on Job 42:15 which originated in ecstatic-mystical circles around the turn of the era. 145. G. A. Anderson and M. E. Stone, A Synopsis of the Books of Adam and Eve (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1994); D. A. Bertrand, La vie grecque d'Adam et Eve (Paris: Maisonneuve, 1987); M. Nagel, "La Vie grecque d'Adam et d'Eve" (Ph.D. Diss., Strasbourg, 1974). Nagel's text is printed in A.-M. Denis, Concordance grecque des pseud^ptgraphes d'Ancien Testament: Concordance, corpus des textes. indices (Louvain-la-Neuve: University catholique de Louvain, 1987) 813-18. For translations and introductions, see L. S. A. Wells, "The Books of Adam and Eve," in APOT, 2:123-54; M. Whittaker, "The Life of Adam and Eve," in Sparks, ed.. The Apocryphal Old Testament. 141-67; M. D. Johnson, "Life of Adam and Eve," in OTP, 2:249-95. For a summary of critical discussion, see M. E. Stone, A History of the Literature of Adam and Eve (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992). Note also the discussion by G. W. E. Nickelsburg, "Some Related Traditions in the Apocalypse of Adam, the Books of Adam and Eve, and 1 Enoch," in B. Layton, ed.. The Rediscovery of Gnosticism. Vol. 2: Sethian Gnosti-


247

Moses, is primarily an account of the death of Adam. Adam, like Job, summons his children and tells of the crucial events of his life, in this case the story of the Fall.^'*^ In chapters 15-29 this story is recounted a second time in far greater detail, by Eve. As in the Testament of Job, Satan appears as a deceiver. Also as in the Testament of Job, the woman is especially vulnerable to his deception, and in the Apocalypse of Moses the woman bears the primary responsibility for the Fall.^*^ Unlike Job, however, Adam succumbed to the temptation, so that the example provided by Adam and Eve is a negative pne.^*^ At the end, a chariot comes to Adam. The account of Adam's translation is much more elaborate than that of Job. God promises to transform him to his former glory and set him on the throne of his deceiver.^'^^ Adam, and also Abel and finally Eve, are buried In Paradise, in the third heaven {Apoc. Moses 37:5), to await the resurrection. The books of Adam and Eve are unusual insofar as they do not envisage the immediate enjoyment of immortality after death. Yet, they do have many points of contact with the apocalypses, especially 2 Enoch}^^ The affinities with the apocalypses are more conspicuous in the Life of Adam and Eve, which contains an account of the fall of Satan (chaps. 12-17) and an ascent of Adam into Paradise, where he is informed of his coming death. He also eats of the tree of knowledge and so knows and perceives what will come to pass in this age (chaps. 25-29).'^^ In the books of Adam and Eve the transgression of the commandments has a central role. Both books devote considerable attention to the repentance of Adam and Eve.'^'^ The drama of disobedience is given a supernatural backdrop through the role of the satanic deceiver. The ultimate resolution of the story lies in the promise of resurrection, and this involves a supernatural revelation of the fate of Adam. The oil of mercy is denied to Adam for the present but is promised at the resurrection.'^^ The apocalyptic hope provides cism (Studies in the History of Religions 41; Leiden: Brill, 1980) 515-39; idem, Jewish Literature between the Bible and the Mishnah (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981) 253-57; idem, "The Bible Rewritten and Expanded," in Stone, ed.. Jewish Writings, 110-18; and G. Vermes and M. Goodman, in Schiirer, The History of the Jewish People, 3.2:757-61, 146. Apocalypse of Moses 5-8; Life ofAdam and Eve 30-34. The testamentary elements are stressed by Nickelsburg in his treatments. 147. In Apoc. Moses 21:6. Adam exclaims after eating the fruit: "O wicked woman, what have 1 done to thee that thou hast deprived me of the glory of God?" In the Life of Adam and Eve (9-11) Eve is deceived by Satan and abandons her penitence until Adam rebukes her. 148. Apoc. Moses 30:1: "Now then, my children, I have shown you the way in which we were deceived, and do ye guard yourselves from transgressing against the good." 149. Apoc. Moses 39:2; Life 48:3. 150. Wells ("The Books of Adam and Eve," 126) notes the parallels in the conception of the tree of life, the sacred oil, the sin of Eve, the lake of purification, the seven heavens, etc. 151. This passage includes a Christian interpolation. 152. Life of Adam and Eve 1-11; Apocalypse of Moses 32. 153. Apocalypse of Moses 13; Life of Adam and Eve 40-42.

248


the premises for obedience and for repentance. Yet, within their supernatural framework the books of Adam and Eve conform to a pattern of covenantal nomism and place less emphasis on the heavenly revelations than the does Testament of Job or the apocalypses. The provenance of the Apocalypse of Moses and of the Life of Adam and Eve is far from clear. Their affinities with such works as the Testament of Job and 2 Enoch support an origin in the Hellenistic Diaspora.'^* Many scholars have argued for a Semitic original, or at least for Semitic sources underlying the G r e e k , b u t these arguments have been shown to be unreliable.'^^ The supernatural and apocalyptic elements in these books were widespread both in Palestine and in the Diaspora. The original date of composition is usually put in the first or early second century C.E.,'^'' but specific evidence is lacking.

T h e Testament of Abraham Another story of the death of a patriarch is found in the Testament of Abraham. This work is not a testament and is, in fact, characterized by Abraham's failure to make a testament.'^^ Instead, we have an extended narrative of Abraham's death, including a full-blown apocalypse in the account of his ride on the chariot, which puts the narrative in the perspective of the heavenly revelation. The Testament of Abraham survives in two recensions.'^'* There is no consensus as to which is earlier. Nickelsburg has argued persuasively that "numerous elements which are simply present in Rec B with no clearly delineated function, are of the essence of the structure and plot of Rec A," and that 154. So Wells, "The Books of Adam and Eve," 129-30. 155. Ibid., esp. the note by Charles on p. 130. So also Johnson, "Life of Adam and Eve," 252, v/ho consequently suggests a Palestinian origin. 156. Stone, A History, 42-53, with an appendix by Stone and G. Bohak. 157. Vermes and Goodman, in Schiirer, The History of the Jewish People, 3.2:759. 158. A. B. Kolenkow, "The Genre Testament and the Testament of Abraham," in G. W. E. Nickelsburg, ed.. Studies on the Testament of Abraham (SCS 6; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1976) 139-52. 159. On the Testament of Abraham as an apocalypse, see J. J. Collins, "The Genre Apocalypse in Hellenistic Judaism," in D. Hellholm, ed., Apocalypticism in the Hellenistic World and the Near East (Ttibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1983) 531-48; idem. The Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic Literature (2d ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998) 251-55. 160. For text and translation, see M. E. Stone, The Testament of Abraham (Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1972); F. Schmidt, Le Testament grec d'Abraham (Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1986). See also E. P Sanders, "Testament of Abraham," in OTP 1:871-902; N. Turner, "The Testament of Abraham," in Sparks, ed.. The Apocryphal Old Testament, 393-421.


249

therefore the longer Recension Abetter preserves the outline of the story. There is wide agreement that the Testament of Abraham is a Jewish work,'^'^ written in Greek.'^^ Egyptian provenance is suggested by several parallels to Egyptian mythology and to other Egyptian Jewish literature.^^** The date is usually put in the late first century C.E. on the basis of parallels to other Hellenistic Jewish writings.'^^ Nickelsburg has shown that Recension A is "neatly divided into two parallel and symmetrical parts," chapters 1-15 and chapters 16-20.^^^ In the first part, Michael comes to take Abraham; in the second part. Death comes. In both cases, Abraham refuses to go and asks for a revelation, as a stalling tactic. In the first part, the revelation is a ride on a chariot "over all the inhabited world" (10:1). In the second part it is the revelation of the rottenness of Death and the variety of his forms. In both cases, Abraham persists in his refusal, even after the revelation, and in the end he is taken by deceit. The Testament of Abraham has rightly been called "a veritable parody on the biblical and traditional Abraham."^^'' The parody lies not only in Abraham's refusal to die, but in the ironic treatment of his character. At the outset, Abraham is characterized by "quietness, gentleness and righteousness," and we are told that "the righteous man was extremely hospitable" (chap. 1). Yet, his refusal to go with Michael is construed in chapter 8 as setting himself up against God. Abraham denies this but asks to see the whole inhabited world. The ensuing ride on the chariot brings about the ultimate revelation of Abraham's character. Whenever Abraham sees people sinning, he asks God to destroy them by having the earth swallow them or fire devour them. God himself is moved to protest:

161. G. W. E. Nickelsburg, "Structure and Message in the Testament of Abraham," in idem, ed.. Studies on the Testament of Abraham, 92. The references here are to Recension A. 162. Christian authorship was defended by a number of older scholars, such as M. R. James and E. Schiirer, but has found no recent followers. See E. Janssen, Testament Abrahams (JSHRZ 5.1; Gutersloh: Mohn, 1974) 199; Vermes and Goodman, in Schurer, The History of the Jewish People. 3.2:763. 163. M. Delcor, U Testament d'Abraham (SVTP 2; Leiden: Brill, 1973) 34; Janssen, Testament, 198-99. R. A. Martin ("Syntax Criticism of the Testament of Abraham," in Nickelsburg, ed.. Studies on the Testament of Abraham, 95-101) suggests that "the producer of Recension A (and probably also the producer of Recension B) is editing a Greek text which was earlier translated from a Semitic language" but allows that some "additions" may not go back to a Semitic original. 164. Delcor, Le Testament, 67-68. 165. Delcor (Le Testament, 47-51) emphasizes affinities with the Testament of Job. Sanders, "Testament of Abraham," in OTP, 1:875-76, relates the Testament of Abraham to 2 Enoch and 3 Baruch. "The Genre Apocalypse." 166. Nickelsburg, "Structure and Message," 85. 167. Ibid., 87.

250


O Archistrategos Michael, command the chariot to stop and turn Abraham aside lest he see the whole inhabited world, for if he sees all those who act in sin, he would destroy the whole creadon. For behold, Abraham has not sinned and he has no mercy on sinners. I, in contrast, made the world and I do not wish to destroy any one of them, but I await the death of the sinner, until he turns and lives, (chap. 10)i^« Abraham is then taken up to see the judgment, where he learns the need for mercy. When a soul is saved by Abraham's prayer, he is moved also to pray for the sinners who were destroyed at his request, for "now I know that I sinned before the Lord our God" (chap. 14). God forgives Abraham and recalls to life those who were destroyed, because "I do not requite in death those whom I destroy living upon the earth." The reveladon of the judgment plays a crucial role in the Testament of Abraham. It convinces Abraham that excessive zeal for the destrucdon of sinners is itself a sin. It also underlies the reveladon, in the second part of the book, of the varieties of Death. Abraham's sin was the destruction of life. Death boasts that he is the destroyer of the world. The boast of Death puts Abraham's sin in perspective and shows its alignment with the forces of destruction.'^^ However, the judgment scene also undercuts the power of Death, since we have already been told that God does not wish destruction and does not further punish those who have been struck down on earth.

The Perspective on Death The purpose of the Testament of Abraham is to provide perspective on the perennial menace of death and judgment. The reader is invited to identify all the more easily with him because he is shown to have his flaws and need forgiveness and because his reluctance to die persists to the end. Yet, while even Abraham remains reluctant to die, the heavenly revelation is consoling. The terror of death is mitigated by the realizadon that, while only one of seventytwo deaths is just, God does not again destroy those who are struck down on earth. The terror of the judgment is midgated by the reveladon that God does not share the severity of "righteous" humans, such as Abraham, and accepts intercession. The second revelatory passage, on the nature of Death, is reassuring rather than terrifying because it is seen in the perspective provided by

168. Cf. Wisd. 1:4; 11:21 -26, on the mercy of God the creator. David Winston has drawn my attention to a similar story about R. Simeon b. Yohai in b. Shabbat 33b. 169. Kolenkow, "The Genre Testament," 146.


251

the judgment scene. The judgment scene also determines the book's ethical message: mercy rather than severity is pleasing to God.

The View of Judaism The message of the Testament of Abraham Is shaped to a great degree by the heavenly revelation of the judgment scene. Therein lies the apocalypdc dimension of the work. Yet, this revelation is not in the service of an esoteric view of Judaism. Rather, as E. R Sanders has remarked, It represents "a kind of lowest common denominator Judaism.""^** The principal characterisdc of this view of Judaism Is the lack of any disdnction between Jew and Gentile. The judgment is on the children of Adam, and there is nothing to indicate that Abraham's intercession is restricted to his own children. The sins which are mentioned are universal ones, such as murder, fornication, and theft. There is no mention of circumcision, dietary laws, or Sabbath observance. The virtue of hospitality was scarcely distinctive to Jews. Sanders has noted that the work is extreme in its lack of distinctive requirements. There is no emphasis on group membership, such as we find in Joseph and Aseneth, or even on the rejection of idolatry which is basic to the Testament of Job. Of the writings we have considered thus far, only Pseudo-Phocylides shows less distinctive coloring than the Testament of Abraham, insofar as that work is ascribed to a Gentile author, while the Testament of Abraham at least presupposes a tradition which venerates the patriarchs. In view of this rather extreme universalism. It is unlikely that the Testament of Abraham is the product of a sectarian g r o u p . I t represents a particularly tolerant formulation of what we have called the common ethic of Hellenistic Judaism. The apocalyptic component, which plays a crucial role in the book, provides a framework for the broadly universalistic ethic. The framework is itself significant: salvation is located in the life after death, and the understanding provided by Abraham's revelation Is necessary if we are to see this life in proper perspective. Yet, Judaism here Is a universal religion In which little significance could be attached to the distinction between Jews and God-fearers. Abraham is depicted in such a way as to emphasize that he is part of sinful humanity. What he learns on his journey is precisely his solidarity with the rest of humanity, a solidarity already indicated in the opening lines of the book.

170. Sanders, "Testament of Abraham," 876. 171. Sanders (ibid.) provides a good critique of the repeated attempts to link the Testament of Abraham with the Essenes or Therapeutae (e.g.. Delcor, Le Testament, 69-73).

252


2 Enoch A similar universalistic ethic within an apocalyptic framework is found in 2 (Slavonic) Enoch. Despite the arguments of J. T. Milik, who regards it as a Christian work of the ninth or tenth century,'''^ the majority opinion clearly favors Jewish authorship and an early date.'''' There is no clearly Christian element in the shorter Recension B, which has been widely recognized as the older recension since the edition of Vaillant.^''^ Further, the peculiar requirement that the four legs of a sacrificial animal be tied together (2 Enoch 59:3) would be difficult to explain in a Christian work. In view of its affinities with Philo and other Hellenistic Jewish writings, and the allusions to Egyptian mythology in its cosmology, 2 Enoch is widely believed to have originated in Egyptian Judaism in the first century C.E.^''^ 2 Enoch is primarily an account of a heavenly journey. At the beginning of the book, Enoch is weeping and grieving. When he is asleep, two angelic "men" come to escort him on a heavenly tour. Before he departs, Enoch gives a brief exhortation to his sons, to practice sacrifice and avoid idolatry. In chapters 3-37 Enoch is guided through the seven heavens in turn.'''^ In the first he sees the angels who govern the stars and the elements. In the second, the place of punishment of the angels who rebelled against the Lord. In the third, the paradise which is at once the original garden of Genesis and the place prepared for the just. On the north of this heaven, he sees the place of

172. J. T. Milik, Tlie BooLs of Enocli: Aramaic Fragments from Qumran Cave 4 (Oxford: Clarendon, 1976) 107-16. 173. J. C. Greenfield, "Prolegomenon," in H. Odeberg. 3 Enoch or the Hebrew Book of Enoch (New York: Ktav, 1973) XVIII-XX; Fischer. Eschatologie. 38-41; Vermes and Goodman, in Schiirer, The History of the Jewish People. 3.2:749, The ter/ninus ante quem is supplied by Origen (De Principiis 1.3.2), who refers to a book of Enoch a propos of the creation of the world. 174. A. Vaillani, Le Livre des Secrets d'Henoch: Texte slave et traduction francaise (Paris: Institiu d'Etudes Slaves, 1952). So also A. Pennington. "2 Enoch," in Sparks, ed.. The Apocryplml Old Testament. 321-62. The older translations, including that of Charles (in APOT. 2:425-69), presupposed the priority of the longer recension. F. Andersen, "2 Enoch," in OTP. 1:92-94, argues that neither recension can be accepted as the original text. So also C. Biittrich, Weltweisheit, Menschheitsethik. Urkult: Studien zum slavischen Henochbuch (Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1992) 59-144. 175. Charles, in APOT, 2:426; M. Philonenko. "La cosmologie du 'Livre des Secrets d'Henoch,'" in Religiotis en Egypte Hellenistique et Romaine (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1969) 109-16; Fischer, Eschatologie, 40. There is a consensus that the book was written in Greek. See A. Rubinstein, "Observations on the Slavonic Book of Enoch," 775 13 (1962) 1-21; Pennington, "2 Enoch," 324; Vermes and Goodman, in Schiirer, The History of the Jewish People, 3.2:748. Andersen, "2 Enoch," 94, suspects a Semitic original, 176. On the motif of the seven heavens, see A. Yarbro Collins, "The Seven Heavens in Jewish and Christian Apocalypses," in eadem. Cosmology and Eschatology in Jewish and Christian Apocalypticism (Leiden: Brill, 1996) 21-54. For a summary of the contents of the various heavens, see BoUrich, Weltweisheit, 150.


253

torture and punishment prepared for sinners. In the fourth heaven he sees the movements of the light of the sun and the moon and the regulation of time. In the fifth he encounters the Egrigori or Watchers who are mourning the fall of their fellow angels. Enoch tells them that he has seen their condemned brethren and exhorts them to resume their service of God. In the sixth heaven he sees seven angels who supervise the order of the world. Finally, in the seventh heaven he comes into the heavenly court. There he is anointed, given garments of glory, and becomes like one of the glorious angels.'^^ There follow two episodes in which Enoch is given direct instruction. First, the angel Vreveil dictates to him "all the works of heaven and earth," and Enoch writes them down in 360 books. Second, God tells Enoch how he created the world. The account is remote from that of Genesis and involves quasi-mythological creatures, Adoil (from whom the great aeon is born) and Arouchaz (who becomes the foundation of creation). At this point, God commands Enoch to return to earth for thirty days to instruct his children and pass on his writings to them. There follows the instruction of Enoch to his sons. This falls into three parts: (1) a lengthy exhortation by Enoch, without introduction (chaps. 39-55); (2) a similar address to Methusalem and his brothers, which appears directly as Enoch's parting testament (chaps. 58-63); and finally (3) a similar address to a multitude of two thousand men who were assembled to see him (chaps. 65-66). Then Enoch Is taken up to heaven (apparently to the seventh), and Methusalem proceeds to offer sacrifice. This concludes the story of Enoch. The legend of Melchizedek is formally a distinct unit, independent of the apocalypse, whether or not it was originally juxtaposed with it in a single composition.'''^

The Hortatory Message The message of 2 Enoch is most clearly formulated in the frequent exhortations. The apocalyptic heavenly journey provides a supporting framework."^^ In that journey, two kinds of material are emphasized: evidence of the order of creation and evidence of an eschatological judgment. The first of these is found in the first, fourth, and sixth heavens. Enoch is shown that the sun and moon follow a regular orderly course. The elements are not at the mercy of 177. M. Himmelfarb, "Revelation and Rapture: The Transformation of the Visionary in the Ascent Apocalypses," in J. J. Collins and J. H. Charlesworth, eds., Mysteries and Revelations: Apocalyptic Studies since the Uppsala Colloquium (JSPSup 9; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991) 83, notes that the process resembles priestly investiture. 178. The Melchizedek legend is omitted in some manuscripts. See R. H. Charles and W. R. Morfill, The Book of the Secrets of Enoch (Oxford: Clarendon, 1896) xiii; Fischer, Eschatologie, 40. 179. Collins, "The Genre Apocalypse in Hellenistic Judaism," 533-37.

254


chance, but each has an angel directing it, and these in turn are supervised from the sixth heaven. The uhimate basis for this entire order is the creation, which God describes to Enoch in chapters 24-30. The implications of this order for human conduct are quite clear. When God is dispatching Enoch to the earth, he tells him: "Go down onto the earth and tell your sons all that I have told you, everything that you have seen, from the lowest heavens up to my throne. All the host I created. There is no one who opposes me or who is insubordinate, and all submit themselves to my sole rule" (33:6-7). Humanity, evidently, should do likewise. God specifies for Enoch the purpose of his mission: that they may know the creator of all things and know that there is no other apart from him. In the course of his exhortations, Enoch frequently refers back to the created order of the universe. The basis for human respect is that the Lord made man in his own likeness (44:1). Enoch begins his testament to Methusalem and his brothers by reminding them of the relations between man and beast established at creation (chap. 58). His final exhortation to the assembled multitude begins by recounting how God created everything, including humanity (chap. 65). An understanding of the order of the world is the first underpinning of Enoch's message. In this respect it stands in the tradition of the Hebrew wisdom literature.'^" Some scholars have argued that it contains an implicit interpretation of the Mosaic law,'^^ but Enoch, who supposedly lived before Moses, seeks a more fundamental, and universal, authority for his teaching. The exhortations of Enoch are not based solely on the order of creation. They also appeal to an eschatological judgment. Eschatology figures prominently in the heavenly journey. The third heaven is occupied by Paradise and the place of punishment. The second heaven is the place of punishment for the fallen angels, who are paradigmatic for humanity. The sojourn in the fifth heaven with the Egrigori recalls the fate of the fallen angels as a warning for others. Finally, the transformation of Enoch into the likeness of the angels in the seventh heaven has clear eschatological implications. These eschatological revelations figure prominently in the exhortations of Enoch. The contrasfing places of reward and punishment in the third heaven provide the main context in which virtues and vices are articulated. Enoch repeatedly refers to a final judgment. The actual content of the exhortadons is remarkably simple. It is mainly concerned with natural justice — clothing the naked and feeding the hungry. The basic principle is that whoever offends "the face of man" offends "the face of God" (44:2). There are warnings to serve and fear 180. Bottrich, Weltweisheit, 162, emphasizes the sapiential character of Enoch's message and notes that it envisions a kind of natural law (178-80). 181. E.g., K. W. Niebuhr, Gesetz und Pardnese: Katechismusartige Weisungsreihen in der friihjUdischen Literatur (Tiibingen; Mohr Siebeck, 1987) 192-94.


255

the Lord and to avoid idolatry, but there are no allusions to circumcision or distincdvely Jewish customs. Only one element in the exhortations involves a highly specific practice. This is the repeated insistence on sacrifice, with the peculiar requirement that the four legs be tied. Pines has noted that the practice is declared contrary to usage in Mishnah Tamid, and he suggests that "it may have been an accepted rite of a sect which repudiated the sacrificial customs prevailing in Jerusalem."'^^ Yet, there is no attempt in 2 Enoch to polemicize against other groups and, while monotheism is required, no distinction is made between Jews and Gentiles. 2 Enoch is far more speculatively inclined than the Testament of Abraham and spends far more time on the description of the heavenly world. The transformation of Enoch into an angel has evident paradigmatic significance, and the understanding provided by Enoch's revelation is the necessary aid towards that transformation. The persuasiveness of the message depends on the acceptance of, or belief in, the reality of the "other world" revealed by Enoch. Faith, in the sense of insight into the heavenly world, is the basis for the future hope and present action. Yet, here too the heavenly revelations are not an end in themselves but provide the basis for an ethical message. That message does not promote Judaism as a group apart. It promotes monotheism, rejects idolatry, and fosters an attitude of human respect which is based on the order of creation, not on the history of Israel. Once again, the higher revelation is in the service of a universalistic message.

3 Baruch A third Hellenistic Jewish apocalypse, closely related to the Testament of Abraham and 2 Enoch, is found in 3 Baruch.^^^ The Jewish origin of 5 Baruch is not in doubt, despite Christian Insertions in chapters 4 and 11-15 which amount to a new. Christian, redaction of the book.'^* There is also a consensus that it originated in the Hellenistic Diaspora because of its allu182. S. Pines, "Eschatology and the Concept of Time in the Slavonic Book of Enoch," in R. J. Z. Werblowski and J. C, Bleaker, eds.. Types of Redemption (NumenSup 18; Leiden: Brill, 1970)75. 183. J. C. Picard, Apocalypsis Bantchi Graece (PVTG 2; Leiden: Brill, 1967) 75-78; W. Hage, Die griechische Baruch-Apokalypse (JSHRZ 5.1; Gutersloh: Mohn, 1974) 17-20; H. M. Hughes, "3 Baruch or the Greek Apocalypse of Baruch," in APOT, 2:527-41; H. E. Gaylord, "3 (Greek Apocalypse of) Baruch," in OTP, 1:653-79; A. W. Argyle, "The Greek Apocalypse of Baruch," in Sparks, ed.. The Apocryphal Old Testament. 897-914. 184. For a balanced treatment of both the Jewish Grundschrift and the Christian redaction, see D. C. Harlow, The Greek Apocalypse of Baruch (3 Baruch) in Hellenistic Judaism and Early Christianity (SVTP 12; Leiden: Brill, 1996).

256


sions to Egyptian and Greek mythology and its affinities with other products of Egyptian J u d a i s m . S i n c e the apocalypse begins with Baruch lamenting the destruction of Jerusalem, a date after 70 C.E., but not too long after, seems p l a u s i b l e . O r i g e n {De Principiis 2.3.6) refers to a book of Baruch which treats of seven heavens. 3 Baruch mentions only five. Most scholars assume that two were lost in transmission, but we cannot be certain that Origen is referring to the same document, or that he knew it firsthand. Several recent studies have argued that the five heaven schema is o r i g i n a l . I t may be understood as a deliberate adaptation of the usual seven heavens, to make the point that a human being cannot attain full access to the divine throne.'^^ In its present form, 3 Baruch is a shorter and more simple composition than 2 Enoch, and consists of the heavenly journey, with a brief introduction and conclusion. The introduction gives the circumstances leading up to the revelation: Baruch has been grieving over the destruction of Jerusalem. Then an angel appears to show him "the mysteries of God." In the first heaven he sees men who have "the faces of oxen, and the horns of stags, and the feet of goats and the haunches of lambs" (2:3) and who are identified as those "who built the tower of strife against God" (2:7). In the second heaven are men whose appearance was like dogs and their feet like those of stags, and are identified as "they who gave counsel to build the tower" (3:5). The contents of the third heaven are most complex (chaps. 4-9). They include Hades and a dragon which devours the bodies of the wicked. They also include the sun and moon and a phoenix that shields the earth from the sun. In the course of his tour of this heaven, Baruch inquires about "the tree which led Adam astray" and thereby occasions a digression on the vine and the dangers of wine. In the fourth heaven he sees multitudes of birds which sing the praises of God and is told that this is where the souls of the righteous come. The birds are generally assumed to represent the souls of the righteous.'^" Finally, the fifth heaven is marked by a locked gate which is opened by the archangel Michael. In this heaven the angels bring the merits of humanity in baskets to Michael, who takes them up to God (presumably in a higher heaven). Hu185. Picard, Apocalypsis. 77-78; Fischer, Eschatologie, 75. 186. So also Goodman in Schurer, The History, 3.2:791. 187. J. C. Picard, "Observations sur I'Apocalypse grecque de Baruch I: Cadre historique et efficacit^ symbolique," Semitica 20 (1970) 77-103; idem, '"Je te montrerai d'autres mysteres plus grandes que ceux-ci' . . . Notes sur 3 Bar et quelques ecrits apparent^s," in Histoire et Anthropologie des Communautes Juives el Chretiennes dans les Societes Anciennes (Canal 8; Paris: Centre de Recherches de I'Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, 1991) 17-40; Harlow, The Greek Apocalypse of Baruch, 34-76. 188. Harlow, The Greek Apocalypse of Baruch, 75-76. 189. The relation between Hades and the dragon is confused. See Fischer, Eschatologie, 80-82. 190. Hughes (in APOT, 2:539) cites b. Sanhedrin 92b, "And the soul may say: the body has sinned, for since I separated from it, I fly in the air like a bird."


257

manity is rewarded for its merits and punished for the lack of them. The apocalypse ends when Baruch is returned to his place, gives glory to God, and exhorts his listeners to do likewise. Unlike other apocalypdc visionaries, he is not transformed into an angelic state.^^* Unlike Enoch, Baruch does not spell out his message in an explicit exhortation at the end. The work still has a hortatory effect, through the list of vices associated with the fruit of the vine in 4:17 and another list of sins that defile the rays of the sun in 8:5. Much of the revelation focuses on rewards and punishments in the afterlife. So the fate of the animal-like builders of the tower and their advisers in the first two heavens stands in contrast to that of the birdlike righteous in the fourth, and the climax of the revelation is the judgment of the merits of humanity by God. All of this is evidentiy designed to discourage vice and promote virtue.

The Attitude toward Jerusalem 3 Baruch addresses the problem of Jewish identity more directiy than the Testament of Abraham or 2 Enoch, The lists of sins are concerned with such universal matters as murder, fornication, and theft, although idolatry is also included in 8:5. More significant is the attitude toward Jerusalem. At the beginning of the book Baruch asks God: "Lord, why did you bum your vineyard and lay it waste? Why did you do this? And why. Lord, did you not requite us with another punishment but hand us over to such nations as these, so that they reproach us and say: 'Where is their God?'" The angel's reply is surprising: "Understand, O man beloved, and do not trouble yourself so much over the salvation of Jerusalem. The revelations which follow contain no vision of Jerusalem restored, such as we find in the contemporary Judean apocalypse 4 Ezra (10:27, 44) or even in the contemporary Egyptian Jewish Sib. OK 5:420-32. How then does God respond to Baruch's initial question? George Nickelsburg has pointed out that 3 Baruch 16:2 is "a paraphrase, verging on a quotation of the LXX of Deuteronomy 32:21," Reference to punishment at the hands of a "non-nation" and a "foolish nation" responds to the seer's question in 1:2: "Why did you deliver us to nations such as these?" The use of the language of Deuteronomy 32 indicates that the scattering of the people and the destruction of Jerusalem are viewed as punishment for the people's sins.'^-^ 3 Baruch 16 does not specify that the "sons of men" who are to be punished are simply the Jews, and may have a broader

191. M. Himmefarb, Ascent to Heaven in Jewish and Christian Apocalypses (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993) 87. 192. Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature, 302.

258


reference in mind. If we do apply this passage to the fate of Jerusalem, however, it is surprisingly harsh. Baruch has been told not to trouble himself about the salvation of Jerusalem (1:3), not because that salvation is assured but because the destruction of Jerusalem is deserved. J. C. Picard has suggested that the rejection of Jerusalem here goes even further. In 1:2 Jerusalem is the vineyard of the Lord. In chapter 4, the vine is the tree that led Adam astray, but was saved from the flood and now causes all mankind to sin. Picard argues that the vine in chapter 4 symbolizes Jerusalem, like the vineyard in chapter 1. So the apparent digression on the , vine is a symbolic condemnation of Jerusalem and responds directly to the author's problem.'^^ This passage is interrupted by a promise that the fruit of the vine will become "the blood of God" and that salvadon will come through Christ, but this Christian passage is an evident interpoladon, since the chapter concludes with a strong condemnation of the fruit of the vine and a statement that nothing good Is established by it (4:17). The negative connotadons of the vine in this chapter must be regarded as part of an original Jewish composidon. Picard's Interpretadon, that the vine in chapter 4 still refers to Jerusalem, is not explicit in the text, and so must be regarded as less than certain. However, there is no doubt that the apocalypse diminishes the significance of the fall of Jerusalem. In 1:3 Baruch is told not to worry so much about the salvation of Jerusalem. His transition from grief to glorifying God involves no assurance that Jerusalem will be restored. While the apocalypse begins with an opposition between Jerusalem and the nations, it ends with a contrast between individuals who have merits and those who do not. The fate of Jerusalem is of littie consequence for the judgment of individuals. It is of interest to note that even the "builders of the tower" and their advisers are not punished for destroying Jerusalem but for cruelty (in refusing to release a woman for childbirth) and for attempting to discover the nature of heaven."^*

A System of Individual Rewards 3 Baruch replaces the traditional opposition of Israel and the nations with a system of individual rewards and punishments. When the archangel Michael takes up the merits of humanity and brings back their reward, no distinction is made between Jew and Gentile. The significant division is between good and bad. Apart from the sin of idolatry, which is mentioned in 8:5, the ethical 193. Picard, "Observations sur I'Apocalypse grecque de Baruch I," 77-103. 194. Nickelsburg (Jewish Literature, 302-3) implies that the builders are the Romans. Picard ("Observations," 79) sees an allusion to Greek sophists.


259

code is of a highly general nature. As in 2 Enoch, the ethical message of the book is given a supporting framework by the revelation of the heavens and the eschatological judgment. The apocalypse provides an entire systeme du monde^'^^ which seeks to integrate its eschatology into the order of the universe. The cosmology of the apocalypse, like its eschatology, requires supernatural revelation, and therein lies the mystical aspect of 3 Baruch. Supernatural knowledge provides the understanding of the way to salvation. The actual conduct required by the apocalypse, however, is not esoteric at all but conforms to the common ethic which would have been acceptable even to enlightened Gentiles. The revelation of 3 Baruch puts the fall of Jerusalem in perspective, as the Testament of Abraham did with the problem of death. It provides an assurance, in chapter 16, that the destruction was a just punishment, but the primary response is that Jerusalem is insignificant in comparison with the "mysteries of God" — the cosmology of the heavens and the judgment of all humanity. We are reminded of the book of Job, where God's speech from the whirlwind does not respond directly to Job's complaint but puts it in perspective by reciting the mysteries of creation. 3 Baruch, then, resolves the problem of the destruction of Jerusalem by virtually breaking its connection with Jerusalem. This step was in some respects the logical culmination of the tendency which we have seen in Hellenistic Judaism to view Judaism as a religion of ethical monotheism and downplay its ethnic and particularistic aspects. Yet, we need only contrast 3 Baruch with Sibylline Oracle 5, which was written about the same time and which sfill subscribed to the "common ethic," to see how radical the solution of 3 Baruch appears, even within the Egyptian Diaspora. The author of 3 Baruch could have little sympathy with the Diaspora revolt. We may suspect that he came from the upper classes, but there is little in the book to indicate social status. Yet 3 Baruch is more explicitly Jewish than PseudoPhocylides. At least the pseudonym and the angelology presuppose the Jewish tradifion. In abandoning Jerusalem, the author was not abandoning Judaism. He testifies to the range of conceptions of Jewish identity which were still possible in the Diaspora in the period between the revolts.

Conclusion The works we have considered in this chapter are diverse in character, ranging from hymns and drama to narratives and apocalypses. What they all have 195. Picard, "Observations," 95-96.

260


in common is the appeal to higher revelation. The saving acts of God in the history of Israel no longer provide an adequate basis for religion. True understanding depends on some supernatural knowledge which is not accessible to all. This appeal to supernatural knowledge does not of Itself determine the pattern of religion. The books of Adam and Eve sdll represent a pattern of covenantal nomism. In the great majority of cases, however, the emphasis on true understanding shifts the focus away from the specific demands of the law. In virtually all cases, the disdncdve Jewish requirements such as circumcision and the dietary laws are ignored. Further, the significance of membership in the actual Jewish community becomes ambiguous. The main requirement for salvation is the right understanding of wisdom, and in nearly all cases this explicidy entails the rejection of idolatry. The Jewish authors may generally have assumed that true wisdom was found primarily within the Jewish community, as Philo surely did. Yet, in principle, the wise and righteous do not necessarily correspond exacdy to those who are circumcised. So a document like the Testament of Abraham can Ignore the distinction between Jews and Gendles, and the visionary in 3 Baruch need not trouble himself too much over the salvation of Jerusalem. Where the basic understanding was derived from supernatural reveladon rather than the traditional formulation of the covenant, the basis for communal identity had been altered and had become more elusive.

196. That is, they are not mentioned in the texts. We should not infer that they were no longer observed or had lost all importance.

CHAPTER SEVEN

Jews and Gentiles

The literature considered in the preceding chapters shows a hvely attempt by Diaspora Jews to appropriate Hellenistic culture while maintaining their Jewish identity, or rather to reconcile the two facets of their identity, which were in tension, if not incompatible, at some crucial points. Hellenistic culture was not optional for the authors of these texts. It was the sea in which they swam and was an integral part of their identity.^ But it was not unproblematic. Consequently this literature shows a complex attitude toward the Gentile world and the dominant culture. There is much polemic against aspects of that culture, such as idolatry, although the culture as such is never rejected. Moreover, much (not all) of this literature shows a deep concern for Gentile approval. Hence the use of Gentile pseudonyms such as the sibyl or Aristeas and the frequency with which Gentile admiration of Jews or Judaism is noted or alleged. This literature has often been designated as apologetic, propagandistic, or proselytizing. These labels have rather different implications. Apologetic literature, which defends the rationality or even the superiority of Judaism, does not have the conversion of Gentiles as its primary purpose, and may be primarily addressed to the Jews themselves. The idea of a Jewish mission, or of active Jewish proselytism, however, which was a virtual dogma of scholarship in the early twentieth century, has been widely discredited in recent years.^ 1. This point has been made forcefully by E. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism: The Reinvention of Jewish Tradition (Berkeley: University of Califomia Press, 1998). 2. S. McKnight, A Liglit among the Gentiles: Jewish Missionary Activity in the Second Temple Period (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991); S. J. D. Cohen, "Was Judaism in Antiquity a Missionary Religion?" in M. Mor, ed., Jewish Assimilation, Acculturatioti, and Accommodation: Past Traditions, Current Issues, and Future Prospects (Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1992) 14-23; M. Goodman, Mission and Conversion: Proselytizing in the Religious History of the Roman Empire (Oxford: Clarendon, 1994). For the older literature that assumed

261

262


A Jewish Mission? The only evidence for an organized Jewish proselytizing campaign is found in the policies of Hasmoneans toward the Idumeans and Itureans in the late second century B.C.E? There is no evidence that Jewish missionaries were sent out by any central authority to the Greek or Roman world. It is possible, however, that proselytizing was carried on in a less organized way. In the words of Salo Baron: "Ahhough there were no professional missionaries, uninterrupted religious propaganda seems to have gone on throughout the dispersion. There must have been Jews among the idnerant preachers and rhetoricians who voyaged from city to city, propagandizing for one or another idea.'"* There is some evidence for such proselytizing. In 139 B.C.E. the Jews were allegedly expelled from Rome "because they attempted to transmit their sacred rites to the Romans."^ Again under Tiberius in 19 C.E. Jews were expelled because "they were converting many of the natives to their customs."^ The best-known story of an historical conversion to Judaism in the Diaspora is the story of the royal house of Adiabene in the first century C.E., recounted by Josephus (Ant. 20.2.3-4 §§34-48). A Jewish merchant named Ananias "visited the king's wives and taught them to worship God after the manner of the Jewish tradition." Through them he also won over Izates, the crown prince. In the meantime, his mother Helena had been converted by another Jew. When Izates wished to be circumcised, since he considered that he would not be genuinely a Jew otherwise, his mother tried to stop him "For, she said, he was a king; and if his subjects should discover that he was de-

an active and successful Jevk'ish mission, see McKnight, A Light among the Gentiles, 2-3. The main recent defenders of the Jewish mission are D. Georgi, The Opponents of Paul in Second Corinthians (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986) 83-151, and L. H. Feldman, "Was Judaism a Missionary Religion in Ancient Times?" in Mor, ed., Jewish Assimilation, 24-37; idem, Jew and Gentile in the Ancient World (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993) 288-382. 3. Ant. 13.9.1 §§257-58; 13.11.3 §319. The reliability of Josephus's account is sometimes questioned. 4. S. Baron, A Social and Religious History of the Jews (2d ed.; New York: Columbia University Press, 1952) 1:173. 5. Valerius Maximus 1.3.3. Three summaries of this text survive, one of which says that the Jews "attempted to infect the Roman customs with the cuh of Jupiter Sabazius." The second does not mention the Jews, and the third does not mention Sabazius. In "Sabazius and the Jews in Valerius Maximus: A Re-examination," JRS 69 (1979) 35-38, E. N. Lane argues that the Jews were expelled, but that the association with Sabazius is due to an error in the transmission of the text. 6. Cassius Dio, Historia Rotnana 57.18.5a; text available in M. Stem, Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism (3 vols.; Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1974-84) 2:365. Josephus blames this episode on four individuals who deceived a proselyte named Fulvia {Ant. 18.3.4-5 §§65-84). See also Tacitus, Annals 2.85.5; Suetonius, Tiberius 36.1; and E. M, Smallwood, The Jews under Roman Rule (Leiden: Brill, 1976) 201-6.

JEWS AND GENTILES

263

voted to rites that were strange and foreign to themselves, it would produce much disaffection and they would not tolerate the rule of a Jew over them." Ananias supported her, partly out of self-interest, since he feared he would be blamed if there was a revolt, but also because he held that "he could worship God (to theion sebein) even without circumcision if he had fully decided to be devoted to the ancestral customs of the Jews, for this was more important than circumcision." He added that God would pardon him if, constrained by necessity and by fear of his subjects, he failed to perform the rite. Izates was persuaded for the time being, but later another Jew, Eleazar, came from Galilee. He had a reputation for being very strict about the law, and he persuaded Izates that circumcision was indeed necessary. His mother's fears of rebellion were not realized, and, indeed, Izates enjoyed divine protection. He and his mother became renowned benefactors of Jerusalem.'' Finally we may note the oft-quoted denunciation of the Pharisees in Matt. 23:15, "for you cross sea and land to make a single convert." It has been argued that the converts in question were Jews converted to the Pharisaic halakah.^ ("To cross sea and land" Is presumably an idiom meaning "to go to great lengths"). The Matthean reference may well refer to the conversion of non-Jews, but other evidence that is commonly cited in this connection is not compelling. Horace, Satires 1.4.138-43 ("like Jews, we will compel you to yield to our throng"), does not necessarily refer to proselytizing at all, but may involve coercion for other purposes.^ This evidence shows that there was some proselytizing activity by Jews from time to time in the ancient world. It scarcely amounts to a missionary movement, however. The main argument for such a movement is the alleged dramatic increase in Jewish population in this period. Baron puts the number of Jews in the middle of the first century C.E. at eight million, or one eighth of the population of the Roman Empire.'*^ Hamack estimated half that number, which would still be considerable.'^ Feldman argues that either figure requires conversion on a massive s c a l e . B u t the only basis for these estimates is Philo's claim that there were one million Jews in Egypt.'^ This claim was not based on any reliable data and may be grossly exaggerated. No confident 7. For an analysis of this story, see L. H. Schiffman, "The Conversion of the Royal House of Adiabene in Josephus and Rabbinic Sources," in L. H. Feldman and G. Hata, eds., Josephus, Judaism, and Christianity (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1987) 293-312. 8. Goodman, Conversion, 69-73. 9. "veluti ludaei cogemus in hanc concedere turbam. " See J. Nolland, "Proselytism or Politics in Horace, Satires 1.4.138-143," VC 33 (1979) 347-55. 10. Baron, A Social and Religious History, 170, 370-72. 11. A. von Harnack, The Mission and Expansion of Christianity in the First Three Centuries (2d ed.; London: Williams and Norgate, 1908) 1-8. 12. Feldman, Jew and Gentile, 293; "Was Judaism a Missionary Religion?" 26-27. 13. In Flaccum 6.23. See Cohen, "Was Judaism in Antiquity a Missionary Rehgion?" 19-20.

264


inferences can be based on such conjectural demographics. The evidence at our disposal suggests that there was no Jewish mission in the Hellenistic world in the sense in which a Christian mission developed. Jewish proselytism was a sporadic affair. Evidence of proselydsm in Egypt is remarkable by its absence. There is, however, evidence of looser forms of attachment to Judaism. Philo claims that "not only Jews but almost every other people, particularly those which take more account of virtue, have so far grown in holiness as to value and honor our laws" (De Vita Mosis 2.17). We may assume some exaggeration here, but the claim is supported by Seneca's complaint that "the customs of this accursed race have gained such influence that they are now received throughout all the world. The vanquished have given their laws to the victors."'* Both Philo and Seneca emphasize the observance of the Sabbath. Philo presents the synagogues as schools of philosophy which stand wide open in every city on each seventh day, where the law is preached under two main "heads" of duty to God and to humanity (De Specialibus Legibus 2.62).'^ Josephus claims that the Jews of Andoch "were constantly attracting to their religious ceremonies multitudes of Greeks, and these they had in some measure incorporated into themselves" (J.W. 7.3.3 §45). Such adherents, who were not full converts, are known in modem scholarship as "Godfearers" and "sympathizers."

T h e "God-fearers" The term "God-fearers" is derived from the book of Acts, where it refers to pious Gendles. '^ The prime example is Comehus, the centurion of Caesarea, in Acts 10. Two others are named: Tidus Justus in 18:7 and Lydia in 16:14. Throughout Acts the phrases phoboumenoi ton theon (e.g., 13:16, 26) and sebomenoi ton theon (in various forms, e.g.. Acts 17:4, 17) occur as technical terms for pious Gentiles. In modem scholarship, these people have often been thought to constitute a well-defined class in association with the synagogue. The description of this class in the Pauly-Wissowa Real-Encyclopadie article of K. G. Kuhn and H. Stegemann is typical: "they frequent the services of the synagogue, they are monotheists in the biblical sense, and they participate in 14. Seneca, in Augustine, De Civitate Dei 6.11. Stem, Greek and Latin Authors, 1:431. 15. On the potential of the synagogue service as a medium for attracting Gentiles, see especially Georgi, The Oppotients of Paul, 84-91. 16. The following discussion is adapted from my article, "A Symbol of Otherness: Circumcision and Salvation in the First Century," in Seers, Sibyls and Sages in Hellenistic-Roman Judaism (Leiden: Brill, 1997) 211-35.

JEWS AND GENTILES

265

some of the ceremonial requirements of the Law, but they have not moved to full conversion to Judaism through circumcision. They are called . . . sebomenoi or phoboumenoi ton theon."^'^ Estimates of their number have been high ("perhaps millions").Yet recently A. T. Kraabel has proclaimed their disappearance and argued that "at least for the Roman Diaspora, the evidence presently available is far from convincing proof for the existence of such a class of Gentiles."'^ The issue has a number of aspects which should be distinguished. First, there is a question as to whether certain expressions such as hoi phoboumenoi ton theon are technical terms for a well-defined class. Second, whether there was a class of pious Gentiles interested in Judaism; and third, whether those Gentiles, if they existed, conformed to the description set out in Pauly-Wissowa. The only undisputed technical name for pious Gentiles is the expression "fearers of heaven" in the Talmudic literature.^'' Even here it does not seem that a consistent code of behavior was implied. In the opinion of Saul Liebermann, "all the 'fearers of Heaven' must have accepted monotheism and the moral laws, whereas in questions of religious ceremonies and ritual they may have widely differed."^' There is also some difference of opinion as to whether these "fearers of heaven" would attain salvation after death. The story of a Roman senator who gave his life to protect the Jews in Midrash Debarim Rahbah 2.24 clearly implies that he would not have been saved if he had not been circumcised.^^ By contrast. Rabbi is said to have told Antoninus that he could eat of Leviathan in the world to come, but not of the Passover lamb, since he was not circumcised.^^ Outside the Rabbinic literature, the main body of evidence is found in Acts in the usage of phoboumenoi and sebomenoi. Even here it is questionable how far these are technical terms rather than ad hoc descriptions.^'* The nontechnical sense is suggested in part by the strange distribution — 17. K. G. Kuhn and H. Stegemann, "Proselyten," PWRESup 9 (1962) 1260. 18. Encyclopedia Judaica, 10:55. 19. A. T. Kraabel, 'The Disappearance of the 'God-Fearers,'" in J. A. Overman and R. S. MacLennan, eds.. Diaspora Jews and Judaism: Essays in Honor of, and in Dialogue witli. A. Thomas Kraabel (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992) 119-30. See also Kraabel and MacLennan, "The God-Fearers — A Literary and Theological Invention," in ibid., 131-43. 20. L. H. Feldman, "Jewish 'Sympathizers' in Classical Literature and Inscriptions," TAPA 81 (1950) 208; F. Siegert, "Gottesfurchtige und Sympathisanten," 75J4 (1973) 110. 21. S. Liebermann, Greek in Jewish Palestine (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1942) 81. 22. Siegert, "Gottesfurchtige," 110-112. 23. Liebermann, Greek in Jewish Palestine, 78-80. 24. K. Lake, "Proselytes and God-Fearers," in F. J. Foakes Jackson and K. Lake, eds., The Begitmings of Christianity: Part I. The Acts of the Apostles (London: Macmillan, 1933) 74-96.

266


phoboumenoi in the first half of Acts, sebomenoi in the second. The expression ton sebomenon proselytdn in Acts 13:43 makes it difficult to maintain that sebomenoi was a technical term for a class distinct from proselytes. Moreover, it is not clear precisely what constitutes a phoboumenos or sebomenos, beyond some reverence for the God of Israel. Cornelius, who is ceitainly not a proselyte, shows his piety by almsgiving and prayer. In other cases the "God-fearers" are associated with the synagogues. In no case, however, are we told how far they kept the Jewish law or whether they were strict monotheists. Supporting evidence for the terminology of Acts is rare indeed. No technical terms for such pious Gendles are found in Hellenlsdc Jewish literature before Josephus. In Joseph andAseneth it is Joseph, the Israelite, who is called theosebes (8:5, 6) and phoboumenos ton theon (8:5, 6 and 8:9).^^ Even in Josephus, only one passage uses sebomenoi in the supposed technical sense {Ant. XA.l.l §110). This passage explains the wealth of the Jerusalem temple by reference to the contributions of ton kata ten oikoumenen loudaion kai sebomenon ton theon. Even in this case the interpretation is disputed. Kirsopp Lake argued that since sebomenon does not have the article, it should be read as a further description of the Jews, so "all the Jews worshipping God throughout the world."26 Against this, the presence of the kai and the analogy with Acts support the view that the sebomenoi are disdnct (e.g., Acts 17:17: "he spoke in the synagogue tois loudaiois kai tois sebomenois").^^ Even if the reference in Josephus is to pious Gentiles, the use of the term is poorly supported. Neither phoboumenos ton theon nor sebomenos ton theon occurs in ins c r i p t i o n s . D e b a t e has centered on the occurrence of the Greek term theosebes and the Latin metuens. The term theosebes is used by Josephus to refer to Poppaea, consort of Nero, who interceded for Jews on two occasions. She was not known for her piety, however, and there is no reason to infer from Josephus anything more than a general sympathy for the Jews.^^ Those, like Lifshitz, who find evidence for the "God-fearers" in the inscripdons assume the existence of this class on the basis of Acts and Josephus and look for anything that could be interpreted as a reference to it.^*^ The problem with 25. Cf. the phrase hoi phoboumenoi ton kyrion with reference to pious Jews in the LXX (2 Chron. 5:6; Pss. 115:9-11; 118:2-4; 135:19-20; Mai. 3:16). See J. A. Overman, 'The GodFearers: Some Neglected Features," in Overman and MacLennan, eds.. Diaspora Jews, 145-52. 26. Lake, "Proselytes and God-Fearers," 85. 27. R. Marcus, 'The Sebomenoi in Josephus," Jewish Social Studies 14 (1952) 247-50; Siegert, "Gottesfurchtige," 127, 28. Siegert, "Gottesfurchtige," 151. 29. Ant. 20.8.11 §195; Vita 16. She was implicated in the murder of Agrippina and the banishment of Octavia. See Siegert, "Gottesfurchtige," 160. 30. B. Lifshitz, "Du Nouveau sur les 'Sympathisants,'" JSJ 1 (1970) 80: "Si done ces demi-proselytes sont indubitablement attest^s chez Josephe et dans le NT on les cherchait tout naturellement dans les inscriptions."

JEWS AND GENTILES

267

this procedure was noted by Feldman.'' Both theosebes and metuens can be used in a pagan, polytheistic context.^^ When they are used in a Jewish context, they may simply refer to Jews. Until recently there was no clear instance of the use of theosebeis to refer to Gentile sympathizers with Judaism. Such an instance now seems to be provided by a late second- or early third-century-c.E. inscription from Aphrodisias in Asia Minor. This inscription uses the term for a group that is distinguished from the Jews but associated with them.'' Other occurrences must now be reconsidered in light of this: for example, the problematic inscriptions from the Miletus theater (Eioudedn ton kai Theosebion), where the word order initially suggests one group, the Jews, rather than two; and the Pantikapaion inscription, which refers to the synagogue ton loudaidn kai theon sebon?'^ It should be noted, however, that theosebes is not in any case an unequivocal term. It may still, on occasion, refer to a Jew (as in Joseph and Aseneth), or, in a polytheistic context, to a pagan. The meaning of each occurrence must be judged from its context. The Aphrodisias evidence bears most directly on the use of the plural theosebeis to designate a group. Occurrences of the singular theosebes in epitaphs or in the inscriptions from the Sardis synagogue remain quite ambiguous. Even in the Aphrodisias inscription it is not clear what qualifies a person as a member of the theosebeis.^^ They may, for example, be people who gave some financial support to the synagogue. Finally, it Is well to remember that theosebeis is not the term used in Acts, and so it does not confer a technical sense on sebomenoi or phoboumenoi. Moreover, the evidence from Aphrodisias in the late second or early third century C.E. cannot be assumed to be valid for other times and places. The case for a technical understanding of metuens rests largely on Juvenal's fourteenth satire, which refers to a Roman father who is metuentem sabbata, "one who fears, or reveres, the Sabbaths."'^ In the same passage, 31. Feldman, "Jewish 'Sympathizers,'" 205. 32. For the term theosebes, see G. Bertram, "theosebes, iheosebeia," TDNT 3 (1965) 123-28. In the phrase deutn metuens. deuin may be genitive plural (Siegert, "Gottesfiirchtige," 152). 33. J. M. Reynolds and R. Tannenbaum, Jews and Godfearers at Aphrodisias (Cambridge: Cambridge Philological Society, 1987). See the maximalist interpretation of this inscription by Feldman, Jew and Gentile, 362-69. 34. See L. Robert, Nouvelles Inscriptions de Sardes (Paris: Maisonneuve, 1964) 41; and T. Rajak, "Jews and Christians as Groups in a Pagan World," in J. Neusner and E. S. Frerichs, eds., "To See Ourselves as Others See Us": Christians. Jews, "Others" in Late Antiquity (Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1985) 247-81. 35. See the comments of A. T. Kraabel, "Synagoga Caeca: Systematic Distortion in Gentile Interpretations of Evidence for Judaism in the Early Christian Period," in Overman and MacLennan, eds.. Diaspora Jews, 46-47; S. J. D. Cohen, "Crossing the Boundary and Becoming a Jew," HTR 82 (1989) 13-33. 36. The argument was developed by J. Bernays, "Die Gottesfiirchtigen bei Juvenal," in Gesammelte Abhandlungen von Jacob Bernays (Berlin: Hertz, 1885) 2:71-80.

268


however, the phrase metuunt ius refers to full proselytes. In the inscriptions, metuens is found in both pagan and Jewish epitaphs. There is no unambiguous occurrence for God-fearer, although that usage is not necessarily excluded.^'' The terminology, then, shows some fluctuation. Phoboumenoi, sebomenoi, and theosebeis can all on occasion refer to Gentiles who are associated with Judaism in some way, but none of these terms is unequivocal, and each occurrence must be interpreted in its own context. The evidence for Gendle adherents of Judaism is not, however, limited to this terminology.^^ We have already noted the statements of Philo and Seneca about the spread of Jewish laws and Josephus's claim that the Jews of Andoch pardally incorporated Gendle admirers. Izates of Adiabene was initially told that it was possible to worship God without circumcision. It has been suggested that the expression "to worship God" (to theion sebein) is a play on the phrase sebomenos ton theon, and denotes a special class of "Godfearers" who observed the Jewish laws but stopped short of circumcision.^^ The class was not necessarily well defined, but the incident shows acceptance by some Jews of Gendles who stopped short of full conversion. Josephus further claims. The masses have long since shown a keen desire to adopt our religious observances; and there is not one city, Greek or barbarian, nor a single nation, to which our custom of abstaining from work on the seventh day has not spread, and where fasts and the lighting of lamps and many of our prohibitions in the matter of food are not observed. (Ag. Ap. 2.282) This claim is corroborated by frequent allusions to Jewish customs in the Roman satirists.*'' Much of the Roman evidence suggests a rather superstitious curiosity, although it could lead in time to full conversion. According to Juvenal: Some who have had a father who reveres the Sabbath worship nothing but the clouds and the divinity of the heavens, and see no difference between eating swine's flesh, from which their father abstained, 37. Siegert. "Gottesfurchtige," 152. 38. Cf. Overman, "The God-Fearers," 151. 39. See Siegert, "Gottesfurchtige," 129. 40. On the Roman reception of Judaism, see M. Stem, "The Jews in Greek and Latin Literature," in S. Safrai and M. Stem, eds.. The Jewish People in the First Century (CRINT 1.2; Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976) 1101-59. Even Augustus is said to have boasted that "not even a Jew, my dear Tiberius, observes the Sabbath fast as faithfully as I did today" (Suetonius, Augustus 76). See also R. Goldenberg, "The Jewish Sabbath in the Roman World up to the Time of Constantine the Great," ANRW 11.19.1 (1979) 414-47.

JEWS AND GENTILES

269

and that of humans; and soon they lay aside their foreskins. Being wont to flout the laws of Rome, they learn and practice and revere the Jewish law, and all that Moses committed to his secret volume: not to show the ways to anyone who does not practice the same rites and to lead only the circumcised to the desired fountain. But the father is to blame, who devoted every seventh day to idleness, keeping it apart from all the concerns of life. (Satires 14:96-106) The distinction between the partially observant father and fully converted son is supported by Epictetus's reference to the type-figure who "is not a Jew but is only acting the part," as opposed to one who has been baptized."*' Juvenal is not, of course, scrupulous about the accuracy of his portrayal of Judaism, but the very fact that he paints with broad strokes assures that the "Sabbath-fearing" father was a familiar figure in Rome in the late first century C.E. We know of several instances in first-century Rome where people of high station were attracted to Judaism. Josephus reports how a lady named Fulvia in the time of Tiberius had gone over to the customs of the Jews and was persuaded by four Jews to send purple and gold to the temple of Jerusalem.^2 Xhe four Jews appropriated the gifts, but the incident was reported to Tiberius and allegedly led to the expulsion of four thousand Jews, who were sent on military service to Sardinia. Poppaea, mistress and eventually second wife of Nero, was at least sympathetic to Judaism, although it is unlikely that she was a proselyte.*' Under Domitian, Flavius Clemens, cousin of the emperor and consul, was executed and his wife, Flavia Domltilla, was exiled. The charge against them was atheism, "a charge on which many others who were drifting into Jewish ways were condemned."'*'* From these examples we can see that Judaism made some inroads into the upper classes, at least in the first century C.E.*^ Tacitus complained that these sympathizers with Judaism

4!. Arrian, Dissertaliones 2.9.19-21. Note that the point of transition here is not circumcision but baptism. 42. Ant. 18.3.5 §§81-84. For discussion see Georgi, The Opponents of Paul, 92-93; Smallwood, The Jews under Roman Rule 201-8. This incident should be related to the report of Tacitus {Annals 2.85.4) that in 19 c.E. action was taken to expel Egyptian and Jewish rites, and that 4,000 freedmen were sent to Sardinia on military duty. See also Suetonius, Tiberius 36. 43. Ant. 20.8.11 §195; Vita 3.16 §3. Josephus says she was theosebes, but see Smallwood, The Jews under Roman Rule, 278 n. 79, who denies that she had any personal leanings toward Judaism. 44. Cassius Dio, Historia Rontana 67.14.1-3; text in Stern, Greek atid iMtin Authors, 2:379-80. See Smallwood, The Jews under Roman Rule, 378. Flavia Domitilla was almost certainly the niece of the emperor. Smallwood suggests that the Rabbinic story of a senator Ketiah bar Shalom, who either was executed for interceding for the Jews or committed suicide, is based on the execution of Flavius Clemens (Smallwood, "Domitian's Attitudes towards Jews and Judaism," Classical Philology 51 [19561 1-13). 45. For further contacts between the imperial household and Judaism, see Siegert, "Gottesfurchtige," 150.

270


sent contributions to Jerusalem: "the worst ones among other peoples, renouncing their ancestral religions, always kept sending tribute and contributing to Jerusalem, thereby increasing the wealth of the Jews."*^ The same phenomenon was cause for boasdng for Josephus, who explained the wealth of the temple by the claim that "all the Jews throughout the habitable world and those who worshipped God, even those from Asia and Europe, had been contributing to it for a very long dme" (Ant. 14.7.2 §110). Josephus also claims that at the outbreak of the Jewish war, when the Syrians had rid themselves of the Jews, "still each city had its Judaizers, who aroused suspicion" (J.W. 2.18.2 §463). These constituted "an equivocal element" which the Syrians regarded as alien, though evidentiy not as Jews.*^ This evidence shows beyond reasonable doubt that Judaism in the Roman Diaspora did win adherents who stopped short of circumcision. Even if one regards the account of Paul's missionary activity in Acts as largely fictional, the fiction requires verisimilitude to establish plausibility. Luke would scarcely have given such prominence to a category that was not known to exist at all. It does not, however, corroborate the description of this class that we find in the Pauly-Wissowa article of Kuhn and Stegemann or in Lifshitz's article. What we find Is a broad range of degrees of attachment, not a class with specific requirements or with a clearly defined status in the synagogue. Juvenal's fourteenth satire illustrates the range: first the father who observes the Sabbath, then the son who worships nothing but the clouds and the divinity of heaven, finally circumcision. Not all so-called "God-fearers," even in Acts, were necessarily monotheists or had necessarily broken.their ties with the pagan community. There was also a spectrum of opinion on the Jewish side, as we can see from the story of Izates. We should like to know more of the manner in which the Jews of Antioch incorporated Greeks, or what the "piety" of the theosebeis of Aphrodisias entailed.

The Function of the Literature Much of the evidence for "God-fearers" and sympathizers comes from the first century C.E. or later, and very littie of it comes from Egypt.*^ Nonethe46. Tacitus, Histories 5.5.1. See Feldman, "Was Judaism a Missionary Religion?" 30. 47. Josephus also claims that the women of Damascus had with few exceptions become converts to the Jewish religion (J. W. 2.20.2 §560). While the claim is hyperbolic, it presumably had some basis. 48. Goodman, Conversion, 118, notes that most of the inscriptional evidence for Godfearers comes from Asia Minor and its environs. He argues that the imposition of the fiscus ludaicus in 96 C E . led to sharper definitions of who was a Jew.

JEWS AND GENTILES

271

less it must be taken into account in considering the function of the predominantly Egyptian Jewish literature that has been the subject of this book. The reports of Josephus and Tacitus that Judaizing Gentiles sent money to Jerusalem is anticipated in the invitation of the Third Sibyl to the Greeks to send gifts to the temple (Sib. Or. 3:545-72). The identification of the God of the Jews with Zeus or Dis in Pseudo-Aristeas and Aristobulus opened the way for Greeks to worship the God of Israel without entirely abandoning pagan religion. The sayings of Pseudo-Phocylides represent the kind of ethical monotheism that might appeal to a God-fearing Gentile who did not want to become a full member of the synagogue. It is clear enough that the Hellenistic Jewish literature was not composed as part of a great Jewish missionary endeavor to convert the Gentiles. There was no such Jewish missionary movement. The current consensus of scholarship is that Jewish literature composed in Greek was almost all addressed to a Jewish audience. Yet Martin Goodman, who has done more than most to demolish the belief in a mission to win proselytes, nonetheless grants that there is "some evidence of a Jewish mission to win gentile sympathizers in the first century.'"*^ It seems to me that we must also allow for such an intention in much of the literature from the second century B.C.E. on. No doubt the polemics against idolatry in the Sibylline Oracles and the Wisdom of Solomon would have offended most Gentiles, if they had happened to read them. But even In these works, we have seen a persistent attempt to formulate arguments that enlightened and sympathetic Greeks might in principle entertain. Whether in fact any of this literature made any impression on Gentiles, we do not know. We have no evidence that it did. Those Gentiles who were attracted to Judaism are more likely to have learned of it from personal contacts or from synagogue services than from literature that they would often have found difficult to comprehend. Even if we allow for some genuine attempt to address the Gentiles, however, there can be little doubt that the Hellenistic Jewish literature was primarily self-expression, the attempt of Hellenized Jews to express and proclaim their own identity. The self-confidence of this literature has been celebrated in recent scholarship, with some justification.^^ But to claim that "the surviving products do not present a struggle for identity in an alien world, an apologia for strange customs and beliefs"^' goes too far. Such an apologia is very explicit In the Letter of Aristeas, and in some of the works of Philo. Moreover, virtually all of this literature is engaged in an apologetic enterprise, to justify the rationality and even superiority of Judaism by Hellenistic 49. Ibid., 87. 50. See especially Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism, 292-93. 51. Ibid. 1 agree with Gruen that the literature is not "propaganda meant to persuade the Gentiles."

272


canons, for the benefit of the Jews themselves, if not of the Gentiles. This enterprise is as clearly evident in a conservative work like 4 Maccabees as it is in the Letter of Aristeas. Only in the more mystically oriented works, such as the apocalypses of 3 Baruch and 2 Enoch, or the Testament of Abraham and Testament of Job, does the apologia for Judaism cease to be a central concern.

Conclusion

It should be apparent from the foregoing chapters that there was no simple normative definition which determined Jewish identity in the Hellenlsdc Diaspora. There are, however, some persistent tendencies. All these attempts to articulate Jewish identity move between two poles. On the one hand, there are the constraints of the Jewish tradition. On the other are the values of the Hellenistic world. Most of the material we have surveyed can be viewed in one aspect as a spectrum of attempts to strike a balance between these competing factors and overcome the dissonance between them. The Jewish tradition could be construed in various ways. The pattern of "covenantal nomism" which E. P. Sanders had posited as the dominant construction of Judaism was certainly represented in the Diaspora, in such diverse works as the chronicle of Demetrius, Fourth Maccabees, and the books of Adam and Eve. Yet it was not the only, or even the dominant, factor in the religion of Hellenistic Judaism. The Jewish tradition could also be construed as the story of a glorious past which fostered ethnic pride, with little regard for religious laws or for anything that could be called nomism, as we found most conspicuously in Artapanus. It could also be construed as a moral system which prized universal human values and attached little importance to distinctive laws such as circumcision. The Jewish people might still be regarded as the paradigm for righteous humanity, but a righteous Gentile was preferable to an unrighteous Jew. Pseudo-Phocylides makes no explicit reference to Judaism. What matters is the code of conduct, not allegiance to a given people. In the Testament of Abraham and 3 Baruch there is ultimately no distinction between Jew and Gentile at the judgment. These are admittedly extreme examples. Loyalty to the Jewish community is evidentiy an important factor in the great majority of cases (3 Maccabees is a striking example). Yet, there was a soft boundary line between Jew and Gentile. The 273

274

CONCLUSION

God-fearers and sympathizers may not have been a well-defined class, but they are important because they illustrate the gray area where the boundary between Jew and Gentile becomes unclear and loses some of its importance. The political identity of the Diaspora Jews is also achieved through balancing traditional loyalty with their new allegiance. Jerusalem enjoys symbolic importance, as it provides the Jews with a venerable center which is peculiarly their own. Yet even a work like Sib. Or. 3, which glorifies the Jerusalem temple, does so without diminishing its loyalty to the Gentile rulers of Egypt. For Philo and his like, the status of Jews in Alexandria was a more urgent concern than the prospect of eschatological restoration in Judea. Only in the traumatic period after 70 C.E. do we find a movement to abandon the Diaspora and return to Jerusalem. Even then this aspiration may not have been shared by the upper-class Jews, and it is only in this period that we find significant social division within the Diaspora. At the same period, we find a diametrically opposite view in 3 Baruch, which is prepared to abandon concern for the welfare of Jerusalem and focus on the merits of the individual. Even the most conservative strands of Diaspora Judaism still attempt to strike a balance with Hellenistic culture. So Demetrius attempts to satisfy the standards of critical historiography, and 4 Maccabees makes full use of Greek rhetoric. Sibylline Oracle 5, which exhibits the most far-reaching rejection of the Gentile world, still uses a traditional Greek form of expression and the pseudonym of the sibyl. This pervasive use of Hellenistic forms of expression cannot be adequately understood as a device to attract the Gentiles. For most of its history. Diaspora Judaism did attempt, with varying degrees of success, to win adherents and sympathizers. The use of Hellenistic forms, however, and even the very desire to win Gentile adherents, sprang from the self-identity of the Jews as respectable civilized members of Hellenistic society. The common thread of Jewish identity, however, comes from the rehance, in whatever form, on the Jewish tradition. The author of 3 Baruch still uses the pseudonym of a Hebrew prophet. Artapanus may pay scant attention to Deuteronomic law, but he is determined to glorify the ancestors of the Jews. Philo's philosophy may be basically derived from the Greek tradition, but he expresses it through exegesis of the Jewish Torah. Even PseudoPhocylides, who makes no explicit references to Judaism, betrays his identity by his use of the Septuagint. This common reliance on the tradition, rather than any specific interpretation of it, is what enables us to distinguish Jew from Gentile in the Hellenistic Diaspora. The attempt of Jews to find common ground with their Gentile neighbors suffered a severe setback in the tragic revolt in the time of Trajan. The tradition was not entirely terminated: the Jewish sibylUne oracles continue for centuries after the revolt. Yet, the attempt at cultural synthesis was under-

CONCLUSION

275

mined and could never again be pursued with such vigor. The legacy of the Hellenistic Diaspora was inherited not by Judaism but by the emerging Chrisdan church. The Hellenlsdc Jews failed to win the respect and acceptance they desired from the Hellenistic world. Yet, their endeavor should not be judged a failure because of its historical outcome. The debacle of the great revolt was not a result of the Hellenizadon of Judaism but of social and political tensions within the Roman Empire, over which Jews had little control. The endeavor to find common ground between Athens and Jerusalem remains a noble effort; it attests a faith in the human community which transcends national, ethnic, and religious boundaries. The attempt to articulate a common ethic, acceptable to diverse traditions, and to relate individual traditions to universal values remains a worthy goal which must still be pursued in our own day. It is in the search for a universal common bond that the future of humanity lies.

Bibliography

Abel. F. M. Les Livres des Maccabees. Paris: Gabalda, 1949. Andersen, F. "2 Enoch." In OTP, 1:91-221. Anderson, B. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso, 1983. Anderson, G. A., and M. E. Stone. A Synopsis of the Books of Adam and Eve. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1994. Anderson. H. "3 Maccabees." In OTP, 2:509-29. . "4 Maccabees." In OTP, 2:531-64. Applebaum, S. Jews and Greeks in Ancient Cyrene. SJLA 28. Leiden: Brill, 1979. . "The Legal Status of the Jewish Communities in the Diaspora." In The Jewish People in the First Century, edited by S. Safrai and M. Stem. 420-63. CRINT 1.1. Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974. . "The Organization of Jewish Communities in the Diaspora." In The Jewish People in the First Century, edited by S. Safrai and M. Stern, 464-503. CRINT 1.1. Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974. . "The Social and Economic Status of Jews in the Diaspora." In The Jewish People in the First Century, edited by S. Safrai and M. Stem, 701-27. CRINT 1.2. Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976. Arenhoevel, D. Die Theokratie nach dem 1. und 2. Makkabderbuch. Mainz: MatthiasGrOnewald, 1967. Argyle, A, W. "The Greek Apocalypse of Baruch." In The Apocryphal Old Testament, edited by H. F. D. Sparks, 897-914. Oxford: Clarendon, 1984. Armstrong, A. H. An Introduction to Ancient Philosophy. 3ded. London: Methuen, 1957. Amim, H. F. A. von. Stoicorum Velerum Fragmenta. Leipzig: Teubner, 1905. Attridge, H. W. First-Century Cynicistn in the Epistles of Heraclitus. HTS 29. Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1976. . "Greek and Latin Apocalypses." Semeia 14 (1979) 159-86. . "Historiography." In Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period, edited by M. E. Stone, 157-84. CRINT 2.2. Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984.

276

BIBLIOGRAPHY

277

—. The Interpretation of Bibhcal History in the Atniqiiitates Judaicae of Flavius Josephus. HDR 7. Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1976. —. "Josephus and His Worlcs." In Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period, edited by M. E. Stone, 185-232. CRINT 2.2. Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984. - . "Philo the Epic Poet." In OTP 2:781-84. -. "The Philosophical Critique of Religion under the Early Empire." A/WIV 11.16.1 (1978) 45-77. Audet, J. P. "La sagesse de Menandre I'Egyptien." RB 59 (1952) 55-81. Aziza, C. "L'Utilisation polemique du recit de I'Exode chez les ecrivains alexandrins (IVeme siecle av. J.-C.-Ier siecie ap. J.-C." ANRW 11.20.1 (1987) 41-65. Baer, R. A. Philo's Use of the Categories Male and Female. Leiden: Brill, 1970. Baltzer, K. The Covenant Fortnulary. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1971. Bar-Kochva, B. "The Ass in the Jerusalem Temple." In Josephus' Contra Apionem: Studies in its Character and Context with a Latin Concordance to the Portion Missing in Greek, edited by L. H. Feldman and J. R. Levison, 310-26. Leiden: Brill, 1996. ——Pseudo-Hecataeus 'On the Jews': Legitimizing the Jewish Diaspora. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996. Barclay, J. M. G. Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora frotn Alexander to Trajan (323 BCE~U7 CE). Edinburgh: Clark, 1996. Bardtke, H. Zusdtze zu Esther JSHRZ 1.1. Gutersloh: Mohn, 1973. Baron, A Social and Religious History of the Jews. 2d ed. New York: Columbia University Press, 1952. Barr, J. "Story and History in Biblical Theology." JR 56 (1976) 1-17, Barraclough, R. "Philo's Politics, Roman Rule and Hellenistic Judaism." ANRW 11.21.1 (1984) 417-553. Bartlett, J. R. Jews in the Hellenistic World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985. Batiffol, P. Le Livre de la Priere d'Aseneth. Studia Patristica 1,2, Paris: Leroux, 1889-90, Baumstark, A. "Chaldaei." PWRE 3 (1899) 2059-60. Beauchamp, P. "Le salut corporel des justes et la conclusion du livre de la Sagesse." Bib 45 (1964) 491-526. Beavis, M. A. L. "Anti-Egyptian Polemic in the Letter of Aristeas 130-165 (The High Priest's Discourse)." JSJ 18 (1987) 145-51. Becker, J. Die Testamente der zwolf Patriarchen. JSHRZ 3.1. Gutersloh: Mohn, 1980. Becker, J. Untersuchungen zur Entstehungsgeschichte der Testamente der zwolf Patriarchen. AGJU 8. Leiden: Brill, 1970. Bell, H. I. Jews and Christians in Egypt. London: British Museum, 1924. . Juden und Griechen im Romischen Alexandreia. Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1926. Berger, K. Die Gesetzauslegung Jem. WMANT 40. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Veriag, 1972. Berger, P. The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1969. Berger, P., and T Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1967. Bernays, J. "Die Gottesfiirchtigen bei Juvenal." In Gesammelte Abhandlungen von Jacob Bernays, 2:71-80. Beriin: Hertz, 1885.

278

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bertram, G. "theosebes, theosebeia." TDNT3 (1965) 123-28. Bertrand, D. A. La vie grecque d'Adam et Eve. Paris: Maisonneuve, 1987. Bickerman, E. J. "The Altars of the Gentiles." In Studies in Jewish attd Christian History, 2:324-46. 3 vols. AGJU 9. Leiden: Brill, 1976-86. . "La Charte seleucide de Jerusalem." In Studies in Jewi.sh and Christian History, 2:44-85. 3 vols. AGJU 9. Leiden: Brill, 1976-86. . "The Colophon of the Greek Book of Esther." In Studies in Jewish and Christian History, 1:225-45. 3 vols. AGJU 9. Leiden: Brill, 1976-86. . "The Date of Fourth Maccabees." In Studies in Jewish and Christian History, 1:276-81. 3 vols. AGJU 9. Leiden: Brill, 1976-86. . "The Date of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs," In Studies in Jewish and Christian Histoty, 2:1-23. 3 vols. AGJU 9. Leiden: Brill, 1976-86. . "Zur Datierung des Pseudo-Aristeas." In Studies in Jewish and Christian History, 1:108-36, 3 vols. AGJU 9. Leiden: Brill, 1976-86. ~ — : "Un document relatif a la persecution d'Antiochus IV." In Studies in Jewish and Christian Histoty, 2:105-35. 3 vols. AGJU 9. Leiden: Brill, 1976-86. ——• . "The Jewish Historian Demetrius." In Christianity, Judaism, and Other GrecoRoman Cults: Studies for Morton Smith at Sixty, edited by J. Neusner, 3:72-84, Leiden: Brill, 1975. Reprinted in Studies in Jewish and Christian History, 2:34758, 3 vols. AGJU 9, Leiden: Brill, 1976-86. . "EinjudischerFestbrief vom Jahre 124 v. Chr. (II Mace 1.1-9)." ZAW 32 (1933) 233-54. Reprinted in Studies in Jewish and Christian History, 2.136-58. 3 vols. AGJU 9. Leiden: Brill, 1976-86, - . "MakkabaerbUcher (HI)." PWRE 27 (1928) 797-800. —, "Notes on the Greek Book of Esther." In Studies in Jewish and Christian History, 1:246-75. 3 vols. AGJU 9. Leiden: Brill, 1976-86. —, "Ritualmord und Eselskult." In Studies in Jewish and Christian History, 2:22555. 3 vols. AGJU 9. Leiden: Brill, 1976-86. —, "The Septuagint as a Translation." In Studies in Jewish and Christian History, 1:167-200. 3 vols, AGJU 9. Leiden: Brill, 1976-86. —, Studies in Jewish and Christian Histoty. 3 vols. AGJU 9. Leiden: Brill, 1976-86. Bidez, J., and F. Cumont, Les Mages Hellenises. Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1938. Bimbaum, E. The Place of Judaism in Philo's Thought: Israel, Jews, and Proselytes. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1996. . "What Does Philo Mean by 'Seeing God': Some Methodological Considerations." In SBL 1995 Seminar Papers, 532-55, Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1995. Bizzetti, P. // Libro della Sapienza. Brescia: Paideia, 1984. Boccaccini, G. Middle Judaism: Jewish Thought. 300 BCE to 200 CE. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991. Bohak, G. Joseph and Aseneth and the Jewish Temple in Heliopolis. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1996. Bolkestein, H. Wohltdtigkeit und Armenpflege im vorchristlichen Altertum. Utrecht: Oosthoek, 1939, Borgen, P. Bread from Heaven: An Exegetical Study of the Concept of Manna in the Gospel of John and the Writings of Philo. Leiden: Brill, 1965. . Early Christianity and Hellenistic Judaism. Edinburgh: Clark, 1996. . "Philo of Alexandria," In Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period, edited by M. E. Stone, 233-80. CRINT2.2. Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

279

. "There Shall Come Forth a Man: Reflections on Messianic Ideas in Philo." In The Messiah: Developments in Early Judaism and Christianity, edited by J. H. Charlesworth, 341-61. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992. Bornkamm, G. "Mysterion." TDNT4 (1967) 808-10. Borries, B. de. Quid veteresphilosophi de idolatria senserint. Gottingen; Dieterich, 1918. Bottrich, C. Weltweisheit, Menschheitsethik, Urkult: Studien zurn slavischen Henochbuch. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1992, Bousset, W. "Eine jiidische Gebetssammlung im siebenten Buch der apostolischen Konstitutionen." In Nachrichten von der K. Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Gottingen, Phil.-Hist. Kl. (1915-16) 435-85. Bowker, J. The Religious Imagination and the Sense of God. Oxford: Clarendon, 1978. Box, H. Philonis Alexandrini in Flaccum. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1939. Braun, M. History and Romance in Graeco-Orietital Literature. Oxford: Blackwell, 1938. Breitenstein, U. Beobachtungen zu Spraclie Stil utid Gedankengut des vierten Makkabderbuchs. Basel and Stuttgart: Schwabe, 1978. Bright, J. A History of Israel. 2d ed. Philadelphia; Westminster, 1972. Broek, R. van den. The Myth of the Phoenix according to Classical and Early Christian Traditions. Leiden: Brill, 1971. Brooten, B. J. Love between Women: Early Christian Responses to Homoeroticistn. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996. Bull, R. J. "A Note on Theodotus' Description of Shechem." HTR 60 (1967) 221-28. Bultmann, R. Der Stil der paulinischen Predigt und die kyiusch-.stoische Diatribe. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1910. Burchard, C. "Joseph and Aseneth." In OTP 2:177-247. . "Joseph et Aseneth: Questions Actuelles." In La Litterature Juive entre Tenach et Mischna, edited by W. C. Van Unnik, 96-97. Leiden: Brill, 1974. . Joseph und Aseneth. JSHRZ 2.4. Gutersloh: Mohn, 1983. . "Zum Text von 'Joseph und Aseneth.'" JSJ 1 (1970) 3-34. . Untersuchungen zu Joseph und Aseneth. WUNT 8. Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1965. -. "Ein vorlaufiger griechischer Text von Joseph und Aseneth." Dielheimer Blatter zum Alten Testament 14 (1979) 2-53. Burkert, W. Ancient Mystery Cuhs. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1987. Burkert, W. Orphism and Bacchic Mysteries: New Evidence and Old Problems of Interpretation. Berkeley: Center for Hermeneutical Studies, 1977. Burr, V. Tiberius Julius Alexander Bonn: Habelt, 1955. Burstein, S. M. The Babyloniaca of Berossus. Malibu: Undena, 1978. Camponovo, O. Konigtum, Konigsherrschaft und Reich Gottes in den FriihjUdischen Schriften. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1984. Cancik, H. "Libri Fatales: Romische Offenbarungsliteratur und Geschichtstheologie." In Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near Ea.st, edited by D. Hellholm, 549-76. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1983. Cardauns, B. "Juden und Spartaner, zur hellenistisch-judischen Literatur." Hermes 95 (1967) 317-24. Carroll, R. P. When Prophecy Failed: Cognitive Dissonance in the Prophetic Traditions of the Old Testament. New York: Seabury, 1979. Cerfaux, L. "Influence des Mysteres sur le Judaisme Alexandrin avant Philon." In Receuil L. Cerfaux, 1:81-85. BETL 6. Gembloux: Duculot, 1954.

280

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Charles, R. H., and W. R. Morfill. The Book of the Secrets of Enoch. Oxford: Clarendon, 1896. Charlesworth, J. H. "Jewish Astrology in the Talmud, Pseudepigrapha, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and Early Palestinian Synagogues." HTR 70 (1977) 183-200. . "Jewish Interest in Astrology during the Hellenistic and Roman Period." AA^/fW II.20.2 (1987) 926-50. . The Pseudepigrapha and Modern Research. SCS 7. Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1976. . "Rylands Syriac Ms. 44 and A New Addition to the Pseudepigrapha: The Treatise of Shem Discussed and Translated." BJRL 60 (1978) 376-403. Cheon, S. The Exodus Story in the Wisdotn of Solomon: A Study in Biblical Interpretation. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997. Chesnutt, R. From Death to Life: Conversion in Joseph andAseneth. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995. . "The Setting and Purpose of Joseph and Aseneth." JSP 2 (1988) 21-48. Chester, A. "Jewish Messianic Expectations and Mediatorial Figures and Pauline Christology." In Paulus und das antike Judentum, edited by M. Hengel and U. Heckel, 17-89. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1991. . "The Sibyl and the Temple." In Templum Amicitiae: Essays on the Second Temple Presented to Ernst Bammel, edited by W. Horbury, 37-69. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1991. Christ, F. "Des Leben nach dem Tode bei Pseudo-Phokylides." TZ 31 (1975) 140-49. Coggins, R. J. Samaritans and Jews. Oxford: Blackwell, 1975. Cohen, S. J. D. "'Anti-Semitism' in Antiquity: The Problem of Definition." In History and Hate: The Dimensions of Anti-Semitism, edited by D. Berger, 43-47. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1986. . "Crossing the Boundary and Becoming a Jew." HTR 82 (1989) 13-33. . "Religion, Ethnicity, and 'Hellenism' in the Emergence of Jewish Identity in Maccabean Palestine." In Religion and Religious Practice in the Seleucid Kingdom, edited by P. Bilde, T. Engberg-Pedersen, L. Hannestad, and J. Zahle, 204-23. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press, 1990. • . " 'Those Who Say They Are Jews and Are Not': How Do You Know a Jew in Antiquity When You See One?" In Diasporas in Antiquity, edited by S. J. D. Cohen and E. S. Frerichs, 1-46. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993. ~ — — . "Was Judaism in Antiquity a Missionary Religion?" In Jewish Assimilation, Acculturation, and Accommodation: Past Traditions, Current Issues, and Future Prospects, edited by M. Mor, 14-23. Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1992. Collins, J. J, "Artapanus." In OTP, 2:889-903. —•——. The Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic Literature. 2d ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998. — . The Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Daniel. HSM 16. Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1977. . "Before the Canon: Scriptures in Second Temple Judaism." In idem. Seers, Sibyls and Sages in Hellenistic-Roman Judaism, 3-21. Leiden: Brill, 1997. . "The Biblical Precedent for Natural Theology." JAAR 45, no. 1 (1977) Supp B:35-67. . "Cosmos and Salvation: Jewish Wisdom and Apocalyptic in the Hellenistic

BIBLIOGRAPHY

281

Age." HR (\911) 121 -42. Reprinted in idem. Seers. Sibyls and Sages in HellenisticRoman Judaism, 317-38. Leiden: Brill, 1997. —. Daniel. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993. - . "The Development of the Sibylline Tradition." ANRW 11.20.1 (1987) 421-59. —. "The Epic of Theodotus and the Hellenism of the Hasmoneans." HTR 73 (1980) 91-104. —. "The Genre Apocalypse in Hellenistic Judaism." In Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East, edited by D. Hellholm, 531-48. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1983. —. "The 'Historical' Character of the Old Testament in Recent Biblical Theology." CBQ 4] (1979) 185-204. —. "The Jewish Transformation of Sibylline Oracles." In idem. Seers, Sibyls and Sages in Hellenistic-Roman Judaism, 181-97. Leiden: Brill, 1997. 181-97. —. Jewish Wisdom in the Hellenistic Age. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1997. —. "Natural Theology and Biblical Tradition: The Case of Hellenistic Judaism." CBQ 60 (1998) 1-15. —. "Nebuchadnezzar and the Kingdom of God." In idem. Seers, Sibyls and Sages in Hellenistic-Roman Judaism, 131-37. Leiden: Brill, 1997. —. "The Place of the Fourth Sibyl in the Development of the Jewish Sibyllina." JJS 25 (1974) 365-80. —. "The Provenance of the Third Sibylline Oracle." Bulletin of the Institute of Jewish Studies 2 (1974) 1-18. —. "The Root of Immortality: Death in the Context of Jewish Wisdom." HTR 7! (1979) 177-92. Reprinted in idem. Seers, Sibyls and Sages in Hellenistic-Roman Judaism, 351-67. Leiden: Brill, 1997. —. The Scepter and the Star: The Messiahs of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Ancient Literature. New York: Doubleday, 1995. —. "The Sibyl and the Potter: Political Propaganda in Ptolemaic Egypt." In idem. Seers, Sibyls and Sages in Hellenistic-Rotnan Judaism. 199-210. Leiden: Brill, 1997. —. "The Sibylline Oracles." In Jewish Writings of the Second Tetnple Period, edited by M. E. Stone, 365-71. CRINT 2.2. Assen; Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984. - . "The Sibylline Oracles." In OTP, 1:354-80. —. The Sibylline Oracles of Egyptian Judaistn. SBLDS 13. Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1974. "The Son of Man in First-Century Judaism." NTS 38 (1992) 448-66. —. "Structure and Meaning in the Testament of Job." In SBL 1974 Seminar Papers, 1:35-52. Cambridge, Mass.: Society of Biblical Literature, 1974. —. "A Symbol of Otherness: Circumcision and Salvation in the First Century." In "To See Ourselves as Others See Us": Christians, Jews, "Others" in Late Antiquity, edited by J. Neusner and E. S. Frerichs, 163-86. Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1985. —. "Testaments." In Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period, edited by M. E. Stone, 325-55. CRINT 2.2. Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984. —. "A Throne in the Heavens: Apotheosis in Pre-Christian Judaism." In Death, Ecstasy, and Otherworldly Journeys, edited by J. J. Collins and M. Fishbane, 41-58. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1995.

282

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Conzelmann, H. / Corinthians. Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975. Cowey, J. "Zwei Archive aus dem zweite Jahrhundert vor Christus." Paper presented at the Twenty-first International Congress of Papyrology, Berlin, August 1995. Cowley, A. Aramaic Papyri of the Fifth Century BC. London: Oxford University Press, 1923. Cross, F. M., and S. Talmon, eds. Qumran and the History of the Biblical Text. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1975. Crouch, J. E. The Origin and Intention of the Colossian Haustafel. FRLANT 109. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1972. Dalbert, P. Die Theologie der hellenistischjUdischen Missionsliteratur unter Ausschluss von Philo und Josephus. Hamburg: Reich, 1954. Daniel, J. L. "Anti-Semitism in the Hellenistic Roman Period." JBL 98 (1979) 45-65. Dawson, D. Allegorical Readers and Cultural Revision in Ancient Alexandria. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992. Delcor, M. "The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Hellenistic Period." In The Cambridge History of Judaism. Volume Two: The Hellenistic Age, edited by W. D. Davies and L. Finkelstein, 409-503. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989. -• "L'Immortalite de I'ame dans le Livre de la Sagesse et dans les documents de Qumran." NRTh 11 (1955) 614-30. "Le Temple d'Onias en Egypte." RB 75 (1968) 188-205. . Le Testament d'Abraham. Leiden: Brill, 1973. . "Le Testament de Job, la priere de Nabonide et les traditions targoumiques." In Bibel und Qumran, edited by S. Wagner, 72-73. Berlin: Evangelische Hauptbibelschaftgesellschaft, 1968. . "Un roman d'amour d'origine therapeute: Le Livre de Joseph et Aseneth." Bulletin de Litterature Ecclisiastique 63 (1962) 3-27. . "Vom Sichem der hellenistischen Epoche zum Sychar des Neuen Testaments." ZDPV1% (1962) 34-48. Delia, D. Alexandrian Citizenship during the Roman Principate. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1991. Delling, G. "Einwirkungen der Septuaginta in 'Joseph und Aseneth.'" JSJ 9 (1978) 2956. . "Monos Theos." In Studien zum Neuen Testament und zum hellenistischen Judentum, 391-400. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1970. . Die Taufe im Neuen Testament. Berlin: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1963. Denis, A.-M. Concordance grecque des pseudipigraphes d'Ancien Testament: Concordance, corpus des textes, indices. Louvain-la-Neuve: Universite catholique de Louvain, 1987. . Fragmenta Pseudepigraphorum quae supersunt Graeca. Leiden: Brill, 1970. . Introduction aux Pseudepigraphes Grecs d'Ancien Testament. Leiden: Brill, 1970. Derron, P. Pseudo-Phocylide: Sentences. Paris; Societe d'Edition "Les Belles Lettres," 1986. Dexinger, F. "Ein 'Messianisches Szenarium' als Gemeingut des Judentums in nachherodianischer Zeit?" Kairos 17 (1975) 250-55. Diels, H., and W. Kranz. Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker. 10th ed. Berlin: Weidmann, 1960-61.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

283

Dieterich, A. Nekyia: Beitrage zur Erklarung der neuentdeckten Petrusapokalypse. Leipzig; Teubner, 1893. Doran, R. "Aristeas the Exegete." In OTP, 2:855-59. . "Cleodemus Malchus." In OTP, 2:883-87. . "Jewish Hellenistic Historians before Josephus." ANRW II.20.1 (1987) 246-97. -. "2 Maccabees and 'Tragic History.'" HUCA 50 (1979) 107-14. . "Pseudo-Eupolemus." In OTP, 2:873-82. . "Pseudo-Hecataeus." In OTP, 2:905-19. . Temple Propaganda: The Purpose and Character of 2 Maccabees. CBQMS 12. Washington, D . C : Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1981. Dover, K. J. Greek Homosexuality. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1978. . Greek Popular Morality in tite Time of Plato cmd Aristotle. Berkeley: University of California 1974. Drews, R. The Greek Accounts of Eastern History. Center for Hellenic Studies. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1973. Droge, A. J. Homer or Moses? Early Christian Interpretations of the History of Culture. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1989. Dupont-Sommer, A. Nouveaux apergus sur les manuscrits de la Mer Morte. Paris: Maisonneuve, 1953. . Le quatrieme livre des Machabees: Introduction, Traduction et Notes. Paris: Champion, 1939. Eddy, S. K. The King Is Dead: Studies in the Near Eastern Resistance to Hellenism. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1961. Edelstein, L., and I. G. Kidd. Posidonius I: The Fragments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972. Emmet, C. W. "The Third Book of Maccabees." In APOT, 1:156-73. Engel, H. '"Was Weisheit ist und wie sie entstand, will ich verkiinden': Weish 7,22-8,1 innerhalb des egkdmiun tes sophias (6,22-11,1) als Starkung der Plausibilitat des Judentums angesichts hellenistischer Philosophie und Religiositat." In Lehrerin der Gerechtigkeit, edited by G. Hentschel and E. Zenger, 67-102. Leipzig: Benno, 1991. Enns, R Exodus Retold. HSM 57. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997. Eppel, R. Le Pietisme Juif dans les Testaments des Douze Patriarches. Paris: Alcan, 1930. Ewald, H. The History of Israel 8 vols. Translated by R. Martineau. London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1869-86. Fallon, F. T. "Eupolemus." In OTP 2:861-72. . The Enthronement of Sabaoth. Leiden: Brill, 1978. Feldman, L. H. "Abraham the Greek Philosopher in Josephus." TAPA 99 (1968) 143-56. . "Hellenizations in Josephus' Portrayal of Man's Decline." In Religions in Antiquity: Essays in Memory of E. R. Goodenough, edited by J. Neusner, 333-53. Leiden: Brill, 1968. . "Hellenizations in Josephus' Version of Esther (Ant. Jud. 11.185-295)." TAPA 101 (1970) 143-70. . Jew and Gentile in the Ancient World. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993. . "Jewish 'Sympathizers' in Classical Literature and Inscriptions." TAPA 81 (1950) 200-208. . "Was Judaism a Missionary Religion in Ancient Times?" In Jewish Assimilation,

284

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Acculturation, and Accommodation: Past Traditions, Current Issues, and Future Prospects, edited by M. Mor, 24-37. Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1992. Feldman, L. H., and J. Levison, eds. Josephus' Contra Apionem: Studies in Its Character and Context with a Latin Concordance to the Portion Missing in Greek. Leiden: Brill, 1996. Festinger, L. A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Evanston, III. and White Plains, N.Y.: Row, Peterson & Co., 1957. Festinger, L., H. W. Riecken, and S. Schachter. When Prophecy Fails. New York: Harper, 1956. Fiensy, D. A. Prayers Alleged to Be Jewish: An Examination of the Constitutiones Apostolorum. Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1985. Fiensy, D. A., and D. R. Darnell. "Hellenistic Synagogal Prayers." In OTP, 2:671-97. Fischer, T. "Maccabees, Books of: First and Second Maccabees." In ABD, 4:439-50. Fischer, U. Eschatologie und Jenseitserwartung im Hellenistischen Diasporajudentum. BZNW 44. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1978. Flusser, D. "Paganism in Palestine." In The Jewish People in the First Century, edited by S. Safrai and M. Stem, 1065-1100. CRINT 1.2. Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia, Fortress, 1976. Flusser, D., and S. Amorai-Stark. "The Goddess Thermuthis, Moses, and Artapanus." Jewish Studies Quarterly 1 (1993-94) 217-33. Frankfurter, D. Elijah in Upper Egypt Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993. . "Lest Egypt's City Be Deserted: Religion and Ideology in the Egyptian Response to the Jewish Revolt, 116-117 C E . " JJS 43 (1992) 203-20. Fraser, P. M. Ptolemaic Alexandria. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon, 1972. Freudenthal, J. Die Flavius Josephus beigelegte Schrift iiber die Herrschaft der Vernunft (IV Makkabderbuch). Breslau: Skutsch, 1869. . Hellenistische Studien, 1-2: Alexander Polyhistor und die von ihm erhaltenen Reste juddischer und samaritanischer Geschichtswerke. Breslau: Skutsch, 1875. Friedlander, M. Geschichte der jiidischen Apologetik. Zurich: Schmidt, 1903. Fruchtel, U. Die Kosmologischen Vorstellungen bei Philo von Alexandrien. Leiden: Brill, 1968. Fuks, A. "Aspects of the Jewish Revok in A.D. 115-117." JRS 51 (1961) 98-104. Gabba, E. "The Growth of Anti-Judaism or the Greek Attitude towards Jews." In The Cambridge History of Judaism. Volume 2: The Hellenistic Age, edited by W. D. Davies and L. Finkelstein, 614-56. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989. Gafni, I. M. Land, Center, and Diaspora. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997. Gager, J. G. Kingdom and Commimity. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1975. . Moses in Greco-Roman Paganism. SBLMS 16. Nashville; Abingdon, 1972. . The Origins of Anti-Semitism. New York; Oxford University Press, 1983. Garrett, S. R. "The 'Weaker Sex' in the Testament of Job." JBL 112 (1993) 55-70. Gaylord, H. E. "3 (Greek Apocalypse of) Baruch." In OTP, 1:653-79. Geertz, Clifford. "Religion as a Cultural System." In idem. The Interpretation of Cultures, 88-125. New York: Basic Books, 1973. Geffcken, J. Komposition und Entstehungszeit der Oracula Sibyllina. TU 8.1. Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1902. . Die Oracula Sibyllina. GCS 8. Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1902.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

285

. "Romische Kaiser im Volksmunde der Provinz." Nachrichten der kdniglichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Gottingen, Phil.-Hist. Kl. (1901) 188-95. Georgi, D. The Opponents of Paul in Second Corinthians. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986. . Weisheit Salomos. JSHRZ 3.4. Gutersloh: Mohn, 1980. Giblet, J. "Eupoleme et rhistoriographie du Judaisme hellenistique." ETL 63 (1963) 53954. Gilbert, M. La Critique des Dieitx dans le livre de la Sagesse. AnBib 53. Rome: Biblical Institute, 1973. . "Wisdom Literature." In Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period, edited by M. E. Stone, 283-324. CRINT 2.2. Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984. Ginzberg, L. The Legends of the Jews. 7 vols. Rpt. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1937-66. Goldenberg, R. "The Jewish Sabbath in the Roman World up to the Time of Constantine the Great." ANRW\l.\9.l (1979) 414-47. Goldstein, J. A. 1 Maccabees. AB 41. Garden City, N.Y: Doubleday, 1976. . 2 Maccabees. AB 41A. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1983. . "The Message of Aristeas to Philocrates." In Eretz Israel, Israel, and the Jewish Diaspora: Mutual Relation.^, edited by M. Mor, 1-23. Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1991. . "The Tales of the Tobiads." In Christianity, Judaism and Other Greco-Roman Cults: Studies for Morton Smith at 60, edited by J. Neusner, 85-123. Leiden: Brill, 1975. Goodenough, E. R. By Light, Light: The Mystic Gospel of Hellenistic Judaism. New Haven; Yale University Press, 1935. . Introduction to Philo Judaeus. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1940. . Jewish Symbols in the Greco-Roman Period. 12 vols. New York: Random House, 1953-68. . "Literal Mystery in Hellenistic Judaism." In Quantulacumque: Studies Presented to Kirsopp Lake, edited by R. P. Casey, S. Lake, and A. Lake, 227-41. London: Christophers, 1937. . "The Political Philosophy of Philo Judaeus." Yale Classical Studies 1 (1928) 53102. . The Politics of Philo Judaeus. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1938. Gooding, D. W. "Aristeas and Septuagint Origins: A Review of Recent Studies." VT 13 (1963) 158-80. Goodman, M. Mission and Conversion: Proselytizing in the Religious History of the Roman Empire. Oxford: Clarendon, 1994. Goodrick, A. T. S. The Book of Wisdom. Oxford Church Bible Commentary. London: Rivingtons, 1913. Gorg, M. "Die Religionskritik in Weish 13,If.: Beobachtungen zur Entstehung der Sapientia-Salomonis im spathellenistischen Alexandria." In Lehrerin der Gerechtigkeit, edited by G. Hentschel and E. Zenger, 13-25. Leipzig: Benno, 1991. Greenfield, J. C. "Prolegomenon." In H. Odeberg, 3 Enoch or the Hebrew Book of Enoch, XVIII-XX. New York: Ktav, 1973. Gr6goire, E "Le Messie chez Philon d'Alexandrie." ETL 12 (1935) 28-50. Grelot, P. "L'Eschatologie de la Sagesse et les Apocalypses Juives." In A la Rencontre de

286

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Dieu: Memorial Albert Gelin, edited by A. Barucq, 165-78. Le Puy: Xavier Mappus, 1961. Griffiths, J. G. "Apocalyptic in the Hellenistic Era." In Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East, edited by D. Hellholm, 273-93. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1983. Gruen, E. Heritage and Hellenism: The Reinvention of Jewish Tradition. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998. . "The Origins and Objectives of Onias' Temple." Scripta Classica Israelica 16 (1997) 47-70. Gruenwald, I. Apocalyptic and Merkavah Mysticism. Leiden: Brill, 1980. Guthrie, W. K. C. Orpheus and Greek Religion: A Study of the Orphic Movement. 2d ed. London: Methuen, 1952. Gutman, Y. The Beginnings of Jewish-Hellenistic Literature (in Hebrew). Jerusalem: Bialik, 1958. . "Philo the Epic Poet." Scripta Hierosolymitana 1 (1954) 36-63. Guttmann, M. Das Judentum und seine Umwelt. Berlin: Philo Verlag, 1927. Haas, C. "Job's Perseverance in the Testament of Job." In Studies on the Testament of Job, edited by M. A. Knibb and P. W. van der Horst, 117-54. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989. Habicht, C. 2 Makkabderbuch. JSHRZ 1.3. Gutersloh: Mohn, 1976. Hadas, M. "Aristeas and III Maccabees." HTR 42 (1949) 175-84. . Aristeas to Philocrates. Dropsie College Series. New York: Harper, 1951. . "Ill Maccabees and the Tradition of Patriotic Romance." Chronique d'Egypte 47 (1949) 97-104. . The Third and Fourth Books of Maccabees. Dropsie College Series. New York: Harper, 1953. Hadot, R "Filrstenspiegel." RAC 7 (1970) 555-632. Hage, W. Die griechische Baruch-Apokalypse. JSHRZ 5.1. Gutersloh: Mohn, 1974. Hanson, J. "Demetrius the Chronographer." In OTP, 2:843-54. Happold, F. C. Mysticism: A Study and an Anthology. Baltimore: Penguin, 1963. Harlow, D. C. The Greek Apocalypse of Baruch (3 Baruch) in Hellenistic Judaism and Early Christianity. SVTP 12. Leiden: Brill, 1996. Harnack, A. von. The Mission and Expansion of Christianity in the First Three Centuries. 2d ed. London: Williams and Norgate, 1908. Harrelson, W. "Patient Love in the Testament of Joseph." In Studies on the Testament of Joseph, edited by G. W. E. Nickelsburg, 29-35. Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1975. Hay, D. M. "Things Philo Said and Did Not Say about the Therapeutae." In SBL 1992 Seminar Papers, 673-83. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992. Hayward, R. "The Jewish Temple at Leontopolis: A Reconsideration." 7 / 5 33 (1982) 42943. Hecht, R. D. "Philo and Messiah." In Judaisms and Their Messiahs at the Turn of the Christian Era, edited by J. Neusner, W. S. Green, and E. Frerichs, 139-68. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987. Hegermann, H. "The Diaspora in the Hellenistic Age." In The Cambridge History of Judaism. Volume 2: The Hellenistic Age, edited by W. D. Davies and L. Finkelstein, 115-66. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989. Heinemann, I. "MakkabaerbUcher. Buch IV." PWRE 14.1 (1928) 800-805.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

287

•. Posidonios'Metaphysische Schriften. Breslau: Marcus, 1921, Hengel, M. "Anonymitat, Pseudepigraphie, und 'Literarische Falschung' in der jiidischhellenistischen Literatur." In Pseudepigrapha I: Pseudopythagorica, Lettres de Platon, Litterature pseudepigraphique juive, edited by K. von Fritz, 231-309. Entretiens sur I'Antiquite Classique 18. Geneva: Vandoeuvres, 1972. . Judaism and Hellenism. 2 vols. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974. . Juden, Griechen und Barbaren: Aspelde der Hellenisierung des Judentums in vorchristliclier Zeit. SBS 76. Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1976. English translation, Jews, Greelcs, and Barbarians (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980). . "Messianische Hoffnung und politischer 'Radikalismus' in der judischhellenistischen Diaspora." In Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East, edited by D. Hellholm, 653-84. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1983. . "Qumran und der Hellenismus." In Qumran: Sa piete, sa theologie et son milieu. edited by M. Delcor, 333-72. BETL 46. Paris and Gembloux: Duculot and Louvain University Press, 1978. Henten, J. W. van. "Datierung und Herkunft des Vierten Makkabaerbuches." In Tradition and Re-interpretation in Jewish and Early Christian Literature: Essays in Honour of JUrgen C. H. Lebram, edited by J. W. van Henten, H. J. de Jonge, P. T. van Rooden, and J. W. Wesselius, 136-49. Leiden: Brill, 1986. •. The Maccabean Martyrs as Saviors of the Jewish People: A Study of 2 and 4 Maccabees. Leiden: Brill, 1997, Henten, J. W. van, and R. Abusch. "The Depiction of the Jews as Typhonians and Josephus' Strategy of Refutation in Contra Apionem." In Josephus' Contra Apioneiti: Studies in Its Character and Context with a Latin Concordance to the Portion Missing in Greek, edited by L. H. Feldman and J. R. Levison, 271-309. Leiden: Brill, 1996. Hillers, D. Covenant: The History of a Biblical Idea. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1969. Himmelfarb, M. Ascent to Heaven in Jewish and Christian Apocalypses. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993. -. "Revelation and Rapture: The Transformation of the Visionary in the Ascent Apocalypses." In Mysteries and Revelations: Apocalyptic Studies since the Uppsala Colloquium, edited by J. J. Collins and J. H. Charlesworth, 79-90. JSPSup 9. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991. Holladay, C. R. Fragments from Hellenistic Jewish Authors. 4 vols. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1983-96. . "Jewish Responses to Hellenistic Culture in Early Ptolemaic Egypt." In Ethnicity in Hellenistic Egypt, edited by P. Bilde et al., 139-63. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press, 1992. . "The Portrait of Moses in Ezekiel the Tragedian." SBLASP 10 (1976) 447-52. . "The Textual Tradition of Pseudo-Orpheus: Walter or Riedweg?" In Geschichte — Tradition — Reflexion: Festschrift fiir Martin Hengel sum 70. Geburtstag. I: Judentum, edited by R Schafer, 159-80. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1996. . Theios Aner in Hellenistic Judaism. SBLDS 40. Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1977. Hollander, H. W. Joseph as an Ethical Model in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. Leiden: Brill, 1981.

288

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Hollander, H. W., and M. de Jonge. The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs: A Commentary. Leiden: Brill, 1985. Holtz, T. "Christliche Interpolationen in 'Joseph und Aseneth.'" NTS 14 (1967-68) 48297. Honiginan, S. "The Birth of a Diaspora: The Emergence of a Jewish Self-Definition in Ptolemaic Egypt in the Light of Onomastics." In Diasporas in Antiquity, edited by S. J. D. Cohen and E. Frerichs, 93-127. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993. Horbury, W. "The Messianic Associations of 'The Son of Man.'" JTS 36 (1985) 34-55. Horbury, W., and D. Noy. Jewish Inscriptions of Graeco-Roman Egypt. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992. Homa, K. "Gnome, Gnomendichtung, Gnomologien." PWRESup 6 (1935) 74-90. Horsley R. A. "The Law of Nature in Philo and Cicero." HTR 71 (1978) 35-39. Horst, P. W. van der. Ancient Jewish Epitaphs. Kampen: Kok Pharos, 1991. . "Images of Women in the Testament of Job." In Studies on the Testament of Job, edited by M. A. Knibb and P. W. van der Horst, 93-116. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989. . Essays on the Jewish World of Early Christianity. Gottingen; Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1990. . "Jewish Self-Definition by Way of Contrast in Oracula Sibyllina III 218-247." In Aspects of Religious Contact and Conflict in the Ancient World, edited by P. W. van der Horst, 147-66. Utrecht: University of Utrecht, 1995. . "Moses' Throne Vision in Ezekiel the Dramatist." JJS 34 (1983) 21-29. . The Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides. Leiden: Brill, 1978. . "Some Notes on Ezekiel the Tragedian." In idem, Essays on the Jewish World of Early Christianity. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1990. , ed. Aspects of Religious Contact and Conflict in the Ancient World. Utrecht: University of Utrecht, 1995. Howard, G. "The Letter of Aristeas and Diaspora Judaism." JTS 22 (1971) 337-48. HiJbner, H. "Die Sapientia Salomonis und die antike Philosophie." In Die Weisheit Salomos in Horizont Biblischer Theologie, edited by H. Hubner, 55-81. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1993. Hughes, H. M. "3 Baruch or the Greek Apocalypse of Baruch." In APOT. 2:527-41. Hultgard, A. L'Eschatologie des Testaments des Douze Patriarches. I: Interpretation des textes. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell 1977. Humphrey, E. M. The Ladies and the Cities: Transformation and Apocalyptic Identity in Joseph and Aseneth, 4 Ezra, the Apocalypse and The Shepherd of Hermas. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1995. Humphreys, W. L. "A Life-Style for Diaspora: A Study of the Tales of Esther and Daniel." /fiZ. 92 (1973) 211-23. Jacob, B. "Das Buch Esther bei dem LXX." ZAW 10 (1890) 241-98. Jacobs, I. "Literary Motifs in the Testament of Job." JJS 21 (1970) 1-3. Jacobson, H. The Exagoge of Ezekiel. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983. . "Mysticism and Apocalyptic in Ezekiel the Tragedian." Illinois Classical Studies 6 (1981) 272-93. James, M. R. Apocrypha Anecdota 2. Texts and Studies 5.1. Cambridge: University Press, 1897. Janowitz, N. "Translating Cult: The Letter of Aristeas and Hellenistic Judaism." In SBL 1983 Seminar Papers, 347-57. Atlanta; Scholars Press, 1983.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

289

Janssen, E. Testament Abrahams. JSHRZ 5.L Giitersloh: Mohn, 1974. Jellicoe, S. "The Occasion and Purpose of the Letter of Aristeas: A Re-examination." NTS 12 (1965-66) 144-50. — —. The Septuagint and Modern Study. Oxford: Clarendon, 1968. , ed. Studies in the Septuagint: Origins, Recen.sions, and Interpretations. New York: Ktav, 1974. Jenks, G. C. The Origin and Early Development of the Antichrist Myth. BZNW 59. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1991. Jeremias, J. Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1969, . Die Kindertaufe in den ersten vier Jahrhunderten. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1958. . "The Last Supper." ET 64 (1952-53) 91-92. Johnson, M. D. "Life of Adam and Eve." In OTP. 2:249-95. Jonge, M. de. Studies on the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs: Text and Interpretation. SVTP 3. Leiden: Brill, 1975. . The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs: A Study of Their Text, Composition. and Origin. Assen: van Gorcum, 1953. Juster, J. Les Juifs dans Tempire Romain. 2 vols. Paris: Geuthner, 1914. Kahle, R The Cairo Geniza. Oxford: Blackwell, 1959. Kappelmacher, A. "Zur Tragodie der hellenistischen Zeit." Wiener Studien 44 (1924-25) 69-86. Kasher, A. "Anti-Jewish Persecutions in Alexandria in the Reign of Ptolemy Philopator according to III Maccabees." In Studies in the History of the Jewish People and the Land of Israel, edited by U. Rappaport, vol. 4, 59-76 (Hebrew with English summary). Haifa: Haifa University, 1978. . "The Civic Status of Jews in Ptolemaic Egypt." In Ethnicity in Hellenistic Egypt, edited by P. Bilde et al., 100-121. Aarhus; Aarhus University Press, 1992. . "A Comment on the Jewish Uprising in Egypt during the Days of Trajan." JJS 27 (1976) 147-58. . "First Jewish Military Units in Ptolemaic Egypt." JSJ 9 (1978) 57-67. ~ . "The Jewish Attitude to the Alexandrian Gymnasium in the First Century A.D." American Journal of Ancient History 1 (1976) 148-61. . Jews and Hellenistic Cities in Eretz-Israel. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1990. . The Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1985. — : "Political and National Connections between the Jews of Ptolemaic Egypt and Their Brethren in Eretz Israel." In Eretz Israel, Israel, and the Jewish Diaspora: Mutual Relations, edited by M. Mor, 24-41. Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1991. . "Three Jewish Communities of Lower Egypt in the Ptolemaic Period." Scripta Classica Israelica 2 (1975) 113-23. Kee, H. C. "Ethical Dimensions of the Testaments of the XII as a Clue to Provenance." NTS 24 (1978) 259-70. . "Satan, Magic, and Salvation in the Testament of Job." In SBL J974 Seminar Papers, 1:53-76. Cambridge, Mass.: Society of Biblical Literature, 1974. . "The Socio-Cultural Setting of Joseph and Aseneth." NTS 29 (1983) 394-413. . "The Socio-Religious Setting and Aims of 'Joseph and Asenath.'" In SBL 1976 Seminar Papers, 183-92. Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1976. - . "The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs." In OTP, 1:775-828.

290

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Keil, V. "Onias III — Martyrer oder Tempelgninder?" ZAW 97 (1985) 221-33. Keller, R. "De Aristobulo Judaeo." Phil. Diss., Bonn, 1948. Kellermann, U. Auferstanden in den Himmel. 2 Makkabder 7 und die Auferstehung Mdrtyrer. Stuttgart: Katholisches Bibelwei^k, 1979. Kerenyi, K. Die griechisch-orientalische Romanliteratur. Tiibingen: Mohr, 1927. Kern, O. Orphicorutn Fragmenta. Berlin: Weidmann, 1922.

der

Kerst, R. "1 Kor. 8,6 — ein vorpaulinisches Taufbekenntnis?" ZNW 66 (1975) 130-39. Kilpatrick, G. D. "The Last Supper." ET64 (1952-53) 4-8. Kippenberg, H. G. "'Dann wird der Orient Herrschen und der Okzident Dienen': Zur Begriindung eines gesamtvorderasiatischen Standpunktes im Kampf gegen Rom." In Spiegel und Gleichnis: Festschrift fiir Jacob Taubes, edited by N. W. Bolz and W. Hiibener, 40-48. Wurzburg: Konigshausen und Neumann, 1983. Kippenberg, H. G. Garizitn und Synagoge. Berlin: de Gruyter, 1971. Klauck, H. J. 4 Makkabderbuch. JSHRZ 3.6. Gutersloh: Mohn, 1989. Klein, G. Der dlteste Christliche Katechismus und die JUdische Propaganda-Literatur. Berlin: Reimer, 1909. Knibb, M. A., and P. W. van der Horst, eds. Studies on the Testament of Job. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989. Koester, H. "Nomos Physeos: The Concept of Natural Law in Greek Thought." In Religions in Antiquity: Essays in Memory ofE. R. Goodenough, edited by J. Neusner, 521-41. Leiden: Brill, 1968. Kohler, K. "The Essene Version of the Seven Benedictions as Preserved in the VII Book of the Apostolic Constitutions." HUCA 1 (1924) 410-25. . "The Testament of Job: An Essene Midrash on the Book of Job." In Semitic Studies in Memory of A. Kohut. edited by G. A. Kohut, 264-338. Berlin: Calvary, 1897. Kolarcik, M. The Ambiguity of Death in the Book of Wisdom 1-6. AnBib 127. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1991. Kolenkow, A. B. "The Genre Testament and the Testament of Abraham." In Studies on the Testament of Abraham, edited by G. W. E. Nickelsburg, ed., 139-52. Missoula: Scholars 1976. Kooij, A. van der. "'The Servant of the Lord': A Particular Group of Jews in Egypt according to the Old Greek of Isaiah." In Studies in the Book of Isaiah, edited by J. van Ruiten and M. Vervenne, 383-96. Leuven; Leuven University Press, 1997. Kraabel, A. T. "The Disappearance of the 'God-Fearers.'" In Diaspora Jews and Judaism: Essays in Honor of, and in Dialogue with, A. Thomas Kraabel, edited by J. A. Overman and R. S. MacLennan, 119-30. Atlanta; Scholars Press, 1992. . "Judaism in Western Asia Minor under the Roman Empire." Diss. Harvard, 1968. . "Synagoga Caeca; Systematic Distortion in Gentile Interpretations of Evidence for Judaism in the Early Christian Period." In Diaspora Jews and Judaism: Essays in Honor of, and in Dialogue with, A. Thomas Kraabel, edited by J. A. Overman and R. S. MacLennan, 35-62. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992. Kraabel, A. T., and R. S. MacLennan. "The God-Fearers — A Literary and Theological Invention." In Diaspora Jews and Judaism: Essays in Honor of, and in Dialogue with, A. Thomas Kraabel, edited by J. A. Overman and R. S. MacLennan, 131-43. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992. Kraeling, C. H. "The Jewish Community at Antioch." JBL 51 (1932) 130-60.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

291

Kraeling, E. G. The Brooklyn Museum Aramaic Papyri. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1953. Kraemer, R. S. When Asenath Met Joseph: A Late Antique Tale of the Biblical Patriarch and His Egyptian Wife. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998. . "Women's Authorship of Jewish and Christian Literature in the Greco-Roman." In "Women Like This": New Perspectives on Jewish Women in the Greco-Roman World, edited by A.-J. Levine, 221-42. Atlanta; Scholars Press, 1991. Kraft, R. A. The Testament of Job. T&T 5. Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1974. Kreitzer, L. "Hadrian and the Nero Redivivus Myth." Z W 79 (1988) 92-115. Kroll, W. "Knabenliebe." PWRE 11.1:897-906. Kiichler, M, FrUhjUdische Weisheitstraditionen: Zum Fortgang weisheitlichen Denkens im Bereich des fruhjudischen Jahweglaubens. OBO 26, Freiburg: Universitatsverlag; Gottingen; Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1979. Kudlien, E "Anatomic." PWRESup II (1968) 38-48. Kugel, J. L. The Bible as It Was. Cambridge, Mass.; Harvard University Press, 1997. Kuhn, H. W. Enderwartung und Gegenwdrtiges Heil. SUNT 4. Gottingen; Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966. Kuhn, K. G. "The Lord's Supper and the Eschatological Meal at Qumran." In The Scrolls and the New Testament, edited by K. Stendhal, 65-93. New York: Harper, 1957. Kuhn, K. G., and H. Stegemann. "Proselyten." PWRESup 9 (1962) 1248-83. Kuiper, K. "Le poete juif Ezechiel." REJ 46 (1903) 48-73, 161-77. Kurfess, A. "Oracula Sibyllina XI(IX)-XIV(XII), nicht christlich sondem judisch." ZRGG 1 (1955) 270-72. LaFargue, M. "Orphica." In OTP 2:795-801. Lagrange, M. J. Le Messianisme chez les Juifs. Paris: Gabalda, 1909. Lake, K. "Proselytes and God-Fearers," In The Beginnings of Christianity: Part 1: The Acts of the Apostles, edited by F. J. Foakes Jackson and K. Lake, 74-96. London: Macmillan, 1933. Lane, E. N. "Sabazius and the Jews in Valerius Maximus: A Re-examination." JRS 69 (1979) 35-38. Lapp, R W. "The Second and Third Campaigns at 'Araq el-Emir." BASOR 171 (1963) 839. Laqueur, R. "Thallos." PWRE 2. A 9 (1934) 1225-26. Larcher, C. Etudes sur le Livre de la Sagesse. Paris: Gabalda, 1969. Lease, 0 . "Jewish Mystery Cults since Goodenough." AA'ÎV 11.20.2 (1987) 858-80. Lebram, J. H. C. "Die literarische Form des vierten Makkabaerbuches." V'C28 (1974) 8196. Leon, H. J. The Jews of Ancient Rome. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1960. Lewis, J. J. "The Table-Talk Section in the Letter of Aristeas." NTS 13 (1966) 53-56. Licht, H. Sexual Life in Ancient Greece. London: The Abbey Library, 1932. Liebermann, S. Greek in Jewish Palestine. New York; Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1942. Lietzmann, H. "Jiidisch-griechische Inschriften aus Tell-el-Yehudieh." ZNW 22 (1923) 280-86. Lifshitz, B. "Du Nouveau sur les 'Sympathisants.'" JSJ 1 (1970) 77-84. Lindars, B. "Re-enter the Apocalyptic Son of Man." NTS 22 (1975) 52-72. Lloyd-Jones, H., and P. Parsons, Supplementum Hellenisticum. Texte und Kommentare II. Beriin: de Gruyter, 1983.

292

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Long, A. A., and D. N. Sedley. The Hellenistic Philosophers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987. LUderitz, G. "What Is the Politeuma?" In Studies in Early Jewish Epigraphy, edited by J. W. van Henten and P. W. van der Horst, 183-225. Leiden: Brill, 1994. Ludwich, A. De Theodoti carmine graeco-judaico. Konigsberg University, 1899. Mach, M. "From Apocalypticism to Early Jewish Mysticism." In The Encyclopedia of Apocalypticism. Volume 1: The Origins of Apocalypticism in Judaism and Christianity, edited by J. J. Collins, 229-64. New York: Continuum, 1998. Mack, B. L. "Imitatio Mosis: Patterns of Cosmology and Soteriology in the Hellenistic Synagogue." Studia Philonica 1 (1972) 27-55. Marcus, R. "The Sebomenoi in Josephus." Jewish Social Studies 14 (1952) 247-50. Martin, R. A. "Syntax Criticism of the Testament of Abraham." In Studies on the Testament of Abraham, edited by G. W. E. Nickelsburg, 95-101. Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1976. Mazar, B. "The Tobiads." lEJ 7 (1957) 137-45, 229-38. McGinn, B. Antichrist: Two Thousand Years of the Human Fascination with Evil. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1994. . The Foundations of Mysticism: Origins to the Fifth Century. New York: Crossroad, 1991. McKnight, S. A Light amotig the Gentiles: Jewish Missionary Activity in the Second Temple Period. Minneapolis; Fortress, 1991. Meecham, H. G. The Letter of Aristeas. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1935. Meeks, W. A. "Moses as God and King." In Religions in Antiquity: Essays in Memory of E. R. Goodenough, edited by J. Neusner, 354-59. Leiden: Brill, 1968. Meeks, W. A., and R. L. Wilken. Jews and Christians in Antioch in the First Four Centuries of the Common Era. Sources for Biblical Study 13. Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1978. Meisner, N. Aristeasbrief JSHRZ 2.1. Gutersloh: Mohn, 1973. . Untersuchungen zum Aristeasbrief. Berlin: Kirchliche Hochschule, 1973. Mendels, D. "'Creative History' in the Hellenistic Near East in the Third and Second Centuries B C E : The Jewish Case." JSP 2 (1988) 13-20. . The Land of Israel as a Political Concept in Hasmonean Literature. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1987. Mendelson, A. Philo's Jewish Identity. BJS 161. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1988. . Secular Education in Philo of Alexandria. Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College, 1982. Mendenhall, G. E. Law and Covenant in Israel and the Ancient Near East. Pittsburgh: Presbyterian Board of Colportage, 1954. Merentitis, K. I. Ho loudaios Logios Artapanos kai to Ergon autou. Athens: Murtidos, 1961. Merkel, H. Die Sibylliiien. JSHRZ 5.8. Gutersloh: Mohn, 1998. Merkelbach, R. Roman und Mysterium in der Antike. Munich: Beck, 1962. Meyer, E. Agyptische Chronologic. Berlin: Societas Regia Scientiarum, 1904. Meyer, M. W. The Ancient Mysteries: A Sourcebook. San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1987. Michaelis, W. "hodos." TDNT S (1967) 42-96. Milik, J. T. The Books of Enoch: Aramaic Fragments from Qumran Cave 4. Oxford: Clarendon, 1976.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

293

Modrzejewski, J. M. The Jews of Egypt: From Rameses II to Emperor Hadrian. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1995. Moeliring. H. R. "The Acta pro Judaeis in X\\Q Antiquities of Flavius Josephus: A Study in Hellenistic and Modern Apologetic Historiography." In Christianity, Judaism and Other Greco-Roman Cults: Studies for Morton Stnith at Sixty, edited by J. Neusner, ed., 3:124-58. Leiden: Brill, 1975. Momigliano, A. Alien Wisdom: The Limits of Hellenization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975. — — . "La Portata Storica dei Vaticini sul Settimo Re nel Terzo Libro degli Oracoli Sibillini." In Forma Futuri, 1077-84. Studi in Onore del Cardinale Michele Pellegrino. Torino: Bottega d'Erasmo, 1975. , "Per la data e la caratteristica della lettera di Aristea." Aegyptus 12 (1932) 16173. Reprinted in Quarto Contributo (1969) 213-24. - . "The Second Book of Maccabees." Classical Philology 70 (1975) 8I-J Moore, C. A. Daniel, Esther, and Jeremiah: The Additions. AB 44. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1977. Moore, G. F. Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era: The Age of the Tannaim. 3 vols. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1927-30. Motzo, B. "II Rifacimento Greco di Ester e il III Mac." In Saggi di Storia e Letteratura Giudeo-Ellenistica, 272-90. Firenze: Le Monnier, 1924. Mowinckel, S. He That Cometh. New York: Abingdon, 1954. Mras, K. Eusebius' Werke 8: Die Praeparatio Evangelica. GCS 43. 2 vols. Berlin: Akademie, 1954. Mueller, U. B. Messias und Menschensohn in jiidischen Apokalypsen und in der Ojfenbarung des Johannes. Gutersloh: Mohn, 1972. Murray, O. "Aristeas and Ptolemaic Kingship." JTS 18 (1967) 337-71. Mussies, G. "Greek in Palestine and the Diaspora." In The Jewish People in the First Century, edited by S. Safrai and M. Stem, 1040-64. CRINT 1.2. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976. . "The Interpretatio Judaica of Thot-Hermes." In Studies in Egyptian Religion: Dedicated to Professor Jan Zandee, edited by M. H. van Voss et al., 89-120. Leiden: Brill, 1982. Musurillo, H. The Acts of the Pagan Martyrs: Acta Alexandrinorum. Oxford: Clarendon, 1954. Nagel, M. "La Vie grecque d'Adam et d'Eve." Ph.D. Diss., Strasbourg, 1974. Neusner, J. A Histoiy of the Jews in Babylonia. 2d ed. Leiden: Brill, 1965. Nickelsburg, G. W. E. "The Bible Rewritten and Expanded." In Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period, edited by M. E. Stone, 89-156. CRINT 2.2. Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984. . Jewish Literature between the Bible and Mishnah: A Historical and Literary Introduction. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981. . Resurrection, Immortality, and Eternal Life in Intertestamental Judaism. HTS 26. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1972. . "1 and 2 Maccabees — Same Story, Different Meaning." CTM 42 (1971) 515-26. . "Some Related Traditions in the Apocalypse of Adam, the Books of Adam and Eve, and 1 Enoch." In The Rediscovery of Gnosticism. Volume 2: Sethian Gnosticism, edited by B. Layton, 515-39. Studies in the History of Religions 41. Leiden: Brill, 1980.

294

BIBLIOGRAPHY

. "Stories of Biblical and Early Post-Biblical Times." In Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period, edited by M. E. Stone, 33-85. CRINT 2.2. Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984. . "Structure and Message in the Testament of Abraham." In Studies on the Testament of Abraham, edited by G. W. E. Nickelsburg, 85-93. Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1976. Niebuhr, K. W. Gesetz und Pardnese: Katechismusartige Weisungsreihen in der friihjUdischen Literatur. Tubingen; Mohr Siebeck, 1987. Nildprowetzky, V. "Reflexions sur Quelques Problemes du Quatrieme et du Cinquieme Livre des Oracles Sibyllins." HUCA 43 (1972) 29-76. . La Troisieme Sibylle. Etudes Juives 9. Paris: Mouton, 1970. Nilsson, M. Geschichte der Griechischen Religion. Munich: Beck, 1950. Nissen, A. Gott und der Ndchste im antiken Judentum. WUNT 15. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1974. Nock, A. D. 'The Question of Jewish Mysteries." In Essays on Religion and the Ancient World, by A. D. Nock, selected and edited by Z. Stewart, 1:459-68. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon, 1972. Nolland, J. "Proselytism or Politics in Horace, Satires 1.4.138-143." VC 33 (1979) 34755. . "Sib Or III.265-94: An Early Maccabean Messianic Oracle." JTS 30 (1979) 15867. Norden, E. Die antike Kunstprosa vom VL Jahrhundert v. Chr. bis in die Zeit der Renaissaissance. 1898. Reprint, Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1974. Nordheim, E. von. Die Lehre der Alten: Das Testament als Gliedgattung im Judentum der Hellenistisch-Romischen Zeit. 2 vols. Leiden: Brill. 1980. Novak, D. The Image of the Non-Jew in Judaism. New York and Toronto: Mellen, 1983. O'Neill, J. C. "The Man from Heaven: Sib Or 5.256-59." JSP 9 (1991) 87-102. Oded, B. "Judah and the Exile." In Israelite and Judaean History, edited by J. H. Hayes and J. M. Miller, 486-88. Philadelphia: Westminster. 1977. Orlinsky, H. M. "The Septuagint as Holy Writ and the Philosophy of the Translators." Wf/CA 46 (1975) 89-114. 0stergard, U. "What Is National and Ethnic Identity?" In Ethnicity in Hellenistic Egypt, edited by P. Bilde et al., 16-38. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press, 1992. Overman, J. A. "The God-Fearers: Some Neglected Features." In Diaspora Jews and Judaism: Essays in Honor of, and in Dialogue with, A. Thomas Kraabel, edited by J. A. Overman and R. S. MacLennan, 145-52. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992. Parente, F. "Onias III and the Founding of the Temple of Leontopolis." In Josephus and the History of the Greco-Roman Period: Essays in Memory of Morton Smith, edited by R Parente and J. Sievers, 69-98. Leiden: Brill, 1994. . "The Third Book of Maccabees as Ideological Document and Historical Source." Henoch 10 (1988) 161-66. Parke, H. W. Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy in Classical Antiquity. Edited by B. C. McGing. London: Routledge, 1988. Paul, A. "Les Pseudepigraphes Juifs de Langue Grecque." In Etudes sur la Judaisme Hellenistique, edited by R. Kuntzmann and J. Schlosser. Paris: Cerf, 1984. . "Le Troisieme Livre des Macchabees." AA'ÎVII.20.1 (1987) 298-336. Peerbolte, L. C. L. The Antecedents of Antichrist. Leiden: Brill, 1996.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

295

Pelletier, A. La Lettre d'Aristee e Philocrate. SC 89. Paris: Cerf, 1962. Pennington, A. "2 Enoch." In The Apocryphal Old Testament, edited by H. F. D. Sparks, 321-62. Oxford: Clarendon, 1984. Peretti, A, La Sibilla Babilonese nella Propaganda Ellenistica. Biblioteca di Cultura 21. Firenze: La Nuova Italia Editrice, 1943. Perry, B. E. The Ancient Romances: A Literary-Historical Account of Their Origins. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1967. Pervo, R. I. "Joseph and Aseneth and the Greek Novel." In SBL 1976 Seminar Papers, 171-82. Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1976. . Profit with Delight: The Literary Genre of the Acts of the Apostles. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987. Petrie, P. Hyksos and Israelite Cities. Cairo: British School of Archeology in Egypt and Egyptian Research Account, 1906. Pfister, E. "katharsis." PWRESup 6 (1935) 146-62. Pfitzner, V. C. Paul and the Agon Motif Leiden: Brill, 1967. Philonenko, M. "La cosmologie du 'Livre des Secrets d'Henoch.'" In Religions en Egypte Hellenistique et Romaine, 109-16. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1969. . "Initiation et Mystfere dans Joseph et Aseneth." In Initiation, edited by C. J. Bleeker, 147-53. NumenSup 10. Leiden: Brill, 1965. . Les Interpolations chretiennes des Testaments des Douze Patriarches et les manuscrits de Qoumrdn. Paris: Presses universitaires de France, I960. . Joseph et Aseneth: Introduction, Texte Critique et Notes. Studia Post-Biblica 13. Leiden: Brill, 1968. - . "Le Testament de Job." Semitica 18 (1968) 9-24. —. "Le Testament de Job et les Therapeutes." Semitica 8 (1958) 41-53. Picard, J. C. "'Je te montrerai d'autres mysteres plus grandes que ceux-ci'. . . Notes sur 3 Bar et quelques ecrits apparentes." In Histoire et Anthropologie des Communautes Juives et Chretiennes dans les Societes Anciennes, 17-40. Canal 8. Paris: Centre de Recherches de I'&ole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, 1991. . "Observations sur I'Apocalypse grecque de Baruch I: Cadre historique et efficacit6 symbolique." Semitica 20 (1970) 77-103. . Apocalypsis Baruchi Graece. PVTG 2. Leiden: Brill, 1967. Pines, S. "Eschatology and the Concept of Time in the Slavonic Book of Enoch." In Types of Redemption, edited by R. J. Z. Werblowski and J. C. Bleeker, 72-87. NumenSup 18. Leiden: Brill, 1970. Places, E. des. "Epithetes et attributs de la 'Sagesse' (Sg 7, 22-23 et SVF 1 557 Arnim)." Bib 57 (1976) 414-19. Porten, B. Archives from Elephantine: The Life of an Ancient Jewish Military Colony Berkeley: University of Califomia Press, 1968. . "Elephantine Papyri." In ABD, 2:445-55. Porten, B., and A. Yardeni. Textbook of Ancient Aramaic Documents from Ancient Egypt. 3 vols. Jerusalem: Hebrew University; Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1986-92. Prijs, L. Judische Tradition in der LXX. Leiden; Brill, 1948. Pucci Ben Zeev, M. 'The Reliability of Josephus Flavius: The Case of Hecataeus' and Manetho's Accounts of Jews and Judaism: Fifteen Years of Contemporary Research (1974-1990)." JSJ 24 (1993) 215-34.

296

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Pummer, R. "Genesis 34 in Jewish Writings of the Hellenistic and Roman Periods." HTR 75 (1982) 177-88. Purvis, J. D. The Samaritan Pentateuch and the Origin of the Samaritan Sect. HSM 2. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1968. Qimron, E., and 3. Strugneil. Qumran Cave 4. V: Miqsat Ma'ase ha-Torah. DJD 10. Oxford: Clarendon, 1994. Rabin, C. "Hebrew and Aramaic in the Eirst Century." In The Jewish People in the First Century, edited by S. Safrai and M. Stem, 1007-39. CRINT 1.2. Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976. Rad, G. von. "Die Vorgeschichte der Gattung von 1 Kor 13:4-7." In Geschichte und Altes Testament: Albrecht Alt zum siebsigsten Geburtstag, 153-68. Tubingen: Mohr, 1953. Rahnenfuhrer, D. "Des Testament Hiobs und das NT." ZNW 62 (1971) 68-69. Rajak, T. "The Hasmoneans and the Uses of Hellenism." In A Tribute to Geza Vermes, edited by P. R. Davies and R. T. White, 261-80. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1990. . "Jews and Christians as Groups in a Pagan World." In "To See Ourselves as Others See Us": Christians, Jews, "Others" in Late Antiquity, edited by J. Neusner and E. S. Frerichs, 247-81. Chico, Calif: Scholars Press, 1985. . "Moses in Ethiopia: Legend and Literature." JJS 29 (1978) 111-22. . "Was There a Roman Charter for the Jews?" JRS 74 (1984) 107-203. Rampolla, Cardinal. "Martyre et sepulture des Machabees." RAC 48 (1899) 290-305, 377-92, 457-65. Rappaport, U. "The Hellenization of the Hasmoneans." In Jewish Assimilation, Acculturation, and Accommodation: Past Traditions, Current Issues, and Future Prospects, edited by M. Mor, 1-13. Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1992. Redditt, P. L. "The Concept of Nomos in Fourth Maccabees." CBQ 45 (1983) 249-70. Redmond, S. A. "The Date of the Fourth Sibylline Oracle." The Second Century 1 (198990) 129-49. Reese, 3. M. Hellenistic Influence on the Book of Wisdom and Its Consequences. AnBib 41. Rome: Biblical Institute, 1970. Reider, J. The Book of Wisdom. Dropsie College Series. New York: Harper, 1957. Renehan, R. "The Greek Philosophic Background of Fourth Maccabees." Rheinisches Museum fur Philologie 115 (1972) 223-38. Rengstorff, K. H. "Herkunft und Sinn der Patriarchen Reden in den Testamenten der zwolf Patriarchen." In La Litterature Juive entre Tenach et Mischna, edited by W. C. van Unnik, 28-47. Leiden: Brill, 1974. Reynolds, J. M., and R. Tannenbaum. Jews and Godfearers at Aphrodisias. Cambridge: Cambridge Philological Society, 1987. Riedweg, C. Jiidisch-hellenistische Imitation eines orphischen Hieros Logos: Beobachtungen zu OF 245 und 247 (sog. Testament des Orpheus). Tubingen: Narr, 1993. Riess, E. "Nechepsonis et Petosiridis Fragmenta Magica." Philologus Supplementband 6 (1892-93) 327-88. Robert, L. Nouvelles Inscriptions de Sardes. Paris: Maisonneuve, 1964. Robertson, R. G. "Ezekiel the Tragedian." In OTP, 2:803-19. Rohde, E. Psyche: Seelencult und Unsterblichkeitsglaube der Griechen. Leipzig: Mohr, 1894-98. Rubinstein, A. "Observations on the Slavonic Book of Enoch." JJS 13 (1962) 1-21.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

297

Ruppert, L. "Gerechte und Frevler (Gottlose) in Sap 1,1-6,21: Zum Neuverstandnis und zur Aklualisierung alttestamentlicher Traditionen in der Sapientia Salomonis." In Die Weisheit Salomos in Horizont Biblischer Theologie, edited by H. Hiibner, I -54. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1993. Ruppert, L. Der leidende Gerechte. Forschung zur Bibel 5. Wiirzburg; Echter, 1972. Rutgers, L. V. The Jews in Late Ancient Rome. Leiden: Brill, 1995. Safrai, S. "Pilgrimage to Jerusalem at the End of the Second Temple Period." In idem. Studies on the Jewish Background of the New Testament, 12-21. Assen: Van Gorcum, 1969. . "Relations between the Diaspora and the Land of Israel." In The Jewish People in the First Century, edited by S. Safrai and M. Stern, 184-215. CRINT 1.1. Assen; Van Gorcum; Philadelphia; Fortress, 1974. -. Wallfahrt in Zeitalter des Zweiten Tenipels. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1981. Sanders, E. P. "The Covenant as a Soteriological Category and the Nature of Salvation in Palestinian and Hellenistic Judaism." In Jews, Greeks, and Christians: Religious Cultures in Late Antiquity: Essays in Honor of W. D. Davies, edited by R. Hamerton-Kelly and R. Scroggs, 11-44. Leiden: Brill, 1976. . Paul and Palestinian Judaism. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977. . "Testament of Abraham." In OTP, 1:871-902. Sanders, J. A. "Adaptable for Life: The Nature and Function of Canon." In Magnalia Dei: The Mighty Acts of God: Essays on the Bible and Archaeology in Memory of G. E. Wright, edited by R M. Cross, W. E. Lemke, and R D. Miller, 531-60. New York: Doubleday, 1976. Sanger, D. Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien. WUNT 2.5. Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1980. . "Bekehrung und Exodus: Zum jiidischen Traditionshintergrund von 'Joseph und Aseneth.'" JSJ 10 (1979) 11-36. . "Erwagungen zu Joseph und Aseneth." ZNW 76 (1985) 86-106. Savignac, J. de. "Le Messianisme de Philon d'Alexandrie." NovT A (1960) 319-24. Schafer, P. Judeophobia. Cambridge, Mass.; Harvard University Press, 1997. Schaller, B. Das Testament Hiobs. JSHRZ 3.3. Gutersloh: Mohn, 1979. Schaper, J. Eschatology in the Greek Psalter. Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1995. Schiffman, L. H. "The Conversion of the Royal House of Adiabena in Josephus and Rabbinic Sources." In Josephus, Judaism, and Christianity, edited by L. H. Feldman and G. Hata, 293-312. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1987. Schmidt, F. Testament grec d'Abraham. Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1986. Schmidt, L. Die Ethik der alten Griechen. Berlin; Hertz, 1882. Schnabel, P. Berossos und die babylonisch-hellenistische Literatur. Berlin: Teubner, 1923. Schiirer, E. Geschichte des jUdischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi. 4th ed. Leipzig; Hinrichs, 1909. . The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 B.C.-A.D. 135). Revised and edited by G. Vermes, F. Millar, and M. Goodman. 3 vols. Edinburgh: Clark, 1973-87. Schwartz, D. "Temple or City: What Did Hellenistic Jews See in Jerusalem?" In The Centrality of Jerusalem: Historical Perspectives, edited by M. Poorthuis and C. Safrai, 114-27. Kampen: Kok Pharos, 1996. Schwartz, E. "Alexandros von Milet." PWRE 1.2 (1894) 1449.

298

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Schwier, H. Tempel und Tempelzerstdrung: Untersuchungen zu den iheologischen und ideologischen Faktoren im erslen jiidisch-romischen Krieg (66-74 n. Chr.). Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1989. Scott, J. M. "Exile and tlie Self-Understanding of Diaspora Jews." In Exile: Old Testament, Jewish, and Christian Perceptions, edited by J. M. Scott, 173-218. Leiden: Brill, 1998. . "Philo and the Restoration of Israel." SBL 1995 Seminar Papers, 553-75. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1995. Scott, W. "The Last Sibylline Oracle of Alexandria." CQ 9 (1915) 144-66, 207-28; 10 (1916) 7-16. Segal, J. B. The Hebrew Passover from the Earliest Times. London: Oxford, 1963. Sevenster, J. N. The Roots of Pagan Anti-Semitism in the Ancient World. NovTSup 41. Leiden: Brill, 1975. Shinan, A. "Moses and the Ethiopian Woman." Scripta Hierosolymitana 27 (1978) 66-78. Shutt, J. H. "Letter of Aristeas." In OTP 2:7-34. Siegert, F. "Gottesfurchtige und Sympathisanten." JSJ 4 (1973) 109-64. Simon, M. "Sur quelques aspects des Oracles Sibyllins juifs." In Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East, edited by D. Hellholm, 219-33. Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1983. Sly, D. Philo's Perception of Women. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990. Smallwood, E. M. "Domitian's Attitudes towards Jews and Judaism." Classical Philology 51 (1956) 1-13. . The Jews under Roman Rule. SJLA 20. Leiden: Brill, 1976. . Philonis Alexandrini Legatio ad Gaium. 2d ed. Leiden: Brill, 1970. Smith, J. Z. "The Prayer of Joseph." In OTP 2:699-714. . "The Prayer of Joseph." In Religions in Antiquity: Essays in Memory of E. R. Goodenough, edited by J. Neusner, 253-94. Leiden: Brill, 1968. Smith, M. "Goodenough's Jewish Symbols in Retrospect." JBL 86 (1967) 53-68. Smith, Margaret. "The Nature and Meaning of Mysticism." In Understanding Mysticism, edited by R. Woods. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1980. Snell, B. "Ezechiels Moses-Drama." Antike und Abendland 13 (1967) 150-64. Spencer, S. Mysticism in World Religion. Baltimore: Penguin, 1963. Spittler, R. R "Testament of Job." In OTP, 1:829-68. . "The Testament of Job: A History of Research and Interpretation." In Studies on the Testament of Job, edited by M. A. Knibb and P. W. van der Horst, 7-32. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989. Standhartinger, A. Das Frauenbild im Judentum der hellenistischen Zeit: Ein Beitrag anhand von 'Joseph und Aseneth.'hei^tn: Brill, 1995. Standhartinger, A. " 'Um zu Sehen die Tochter des Landes': Die Perspektive Dinas in der jiidisch-Heiienistischen Diskussion um Gen 34." In Religious Propaganda and Missionary Competition in the New Testament World, edited by L. Bormann, K. Del Tredici, and A. Standhartinger, 89-116. Leiden: Brill, 1994. Steck, O. H. Israel und das gewaltsame Geschick der Propheten. WMANT 23. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1967. Sterling, G. E. Historiography and Self-Definition: Josephos, Luke-Acts, and Apologetic Historiography. Leiden: Brill, 1992. . "'Thus are Israel': Jewish Self-Definition in Alexandria." Studia Philonica Annual 7 (1995) 1-18.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

299

Stem, M. Greek and Latin Autiiors on Jews and Judaism. 3 vols. Jemsalem: Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1974-84. . "The Jewish Diaspora." In Tiie Jewisfi People in the First Century, edited by S. Safrai and M. Stem, 170-80. CRINT 1.1. Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974. . "The Jews in Greek and Latin Literature." In The Jewish People in the First Century, edited by S. Safrai and M. Stern, 1101-59. CRINT 1.2. Assen: Van Gorcum; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976. -. "Notes on the Story of Joseph the Tobiad." Tarbiz 32 (1962) 35-47 (in Hebrew). Stone, M. E. "The Concept of the Messiah in 4 Ezra." In Religions in Antiquity: E.ssays in Memory ofE. R. Goodenough. edited by J. Neusner, 295-312. Leiden: Brill, 1968. . A History of the Literature of Adam and Eve. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992. . The Testament of Abraham. Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1972. Stowers, S. K. "4 Maccabees." In Harper's Bible Commentary, edited by J, L. Mays, 92234. San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1988. Stmgnell, J. "General Introduction, with a Note on Alexander Polyhistor." In OTP, 2:77779. . "Notes on the Text and Metre of Ezekiel the Tragedian's 'Exagoge.'" HTR 50 (1967) 449-57. Sweet, J. P. M. "The Theory of Miracles in the Wisdom of Solomon." In Miracles, edited by C. E D. Moule, 115-26. London: Mowbray, 1965. Tam, W. W. "Alexander Helios and the Golden Age." JRS 22 (1932) 135-59. . The Greeks in Bactria and India. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1938. . Hellenistic Civilization. New York: World, 1961. Taylor, J. E. "A Second Temple in Egypt: The Evidence for the Zadokite Temple of Onias." JSJ 29 (1998) 297-321. Taylor, J. E., and P. R. Davies. "The So-Called Therapeutae of De Vita Contemplativa." HTR 91 (1998) 3-24. Tcherikover, V. Hellenistic Civilization and the Jews. New York: Atheneum, 1970. . "The Ideology of the Letter of Aristeas." HTR 51 (1958) 77-79. . "Jewish Apologetic Literature Reconsidered." Eos 48 (1956) 169-93. . "The Third Book of Maccabees as a Historical Source of Augustus' Time." Scripta Hierosolymitana 1 (1961) 1-26. Tcherikover, V., and A. Fuks, eds. Corpus Papyrorum Judaicarum. 3 vols. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1957-64. Theisohn, J. Der Auserwahlte Richter SUNT 12. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1975. Thomas, Johannes. "Aktuelles in Zeugnis der zwolf Vater." In Studien zu den Testamenten der zwolf Patriarchen. edited by W. Eltester, 62-150. BZNW 36. Beriin: Topelmann, 1969. . Der Jiidische Phokylides. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1992. Thomas, Joseph. Le Mouvement Baptiste en Palestine et Syrie. Gembloux: Duculot, 1938. Thompson-Crawford, D. J. "The Idumaeans of Memphis and the Ptolemaic Politeumata." In Atti del XVII Congresso Internazionale di Papirologia, edited by M. Gigante, 3:1069-75. Naples: Centro Intemazionale per lo Studio dei Papiri Ercolanesi, 1984. . Memphis under the Ptolemies. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1988. Thornhill, R. "The Testament of Job." In The Apocryphal Old Testament, edited by H. E D. Sparks, 617-48. Oxford: Clarendon, 1984.

300

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Thyen, H. Der Stil der Jiidisch-Heiienistischen Homilie. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1955. Tiede, D. L. The Charismatic Figure as Miracle Worker SBLDS 1. Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1972. Tov, E. "Die griechischen Bibelubersetzungen." ANRW II.20.1 (1987) 121-89. Tramontano, R. La lettera di Aristeo. Naples: Ufficio Succursale della Civilta Cattolica, 1931. Trebilco, P. Jewish Communities in Asia Minor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991. Trencs6nyi-Waldapfel, I. "Une Tragedie Grecque a Sujet Biblique." Acta Orientalia 2 (1952) 143-63. Troiani, L. "Sui frammenti di Manetone nel primo libro del Contra Apionem di Flavio Giuseppe." Studi Classici e Orientali 24 (1975) 97-126. Tromp, J. "The Critique of Idolatry in the Context of Jewish Monotheism." In A.spects of Religious Contact and Conflict in the Ancient World, edited by P. W. van der Horst, 105-20. Utrecht: University of Utrecht, 1995. . "The Formation of the Third Book of Maccabees." Henoch 17 (1995) 311-28. Turcan, R. "Le roman 'initiatique': Apropos d'un livre recent." RHR 163 (1963) 149-99. Turner, N. "The Testament of Abraham." In The Apocryphal Old Testament, edited by H. R D. Sparks, 393-421. Oxford: Clarendon, 1984. Ulrichsen, J. H. Die Grundschrift der Testamente der Zwdlf Patriarchen: Eine Untersuchung zu Umfang, Inhalt, und Eigenart der ursprUnglichen Schrift. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, I99I. Vaillant, A. Le Livre des Secrets d'Henoch: Texte slave et traduction francaLse. Paris: Institut d'Etudes Slaves, 1952. Verbrugghe, G. P., and J. M. Wickersham. Berossos and Manetho, Introduced and Translated: Native Traditions in Ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1996. Vermes, G. Scripture and Tradition in Judaism. Leiden: Brill, 1961. Vogel, C. J. De. Greek Philosophy III: The Hellenistic-Roman Period. Leiden: Brill, 1959. Vogt, E. Tragiker Ezechiel. JSHRZ 4.3. Gutersloh: Mohn, 1983. Vogtle, A. Die Tugend- und Lasterkataloge im Neuen Testament. Miinster: Aschendorff, 1936. Volz, P. Die Eschatologie der jUdischen Gemeinde. Tubingen: Mohr, 1934. Wacholder, B. Z. Eupolemus: A Study of Judaeo-Greek Literature. Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College, 1974. . "Pseudo-Eupolemus' Two Greek Fragments on the Life of Abraham." HUCA 34 (1963) 83-113. Walbank, F. W. "Alexander (II) 'Polyhistor.'" In OCD, 35. Walla, M. Der Vogel Phoenix in der antiken Literatur und in der Dichtung des Lakfanz. Vienna: Notring, 1969. Walter, N. Fragmente judisch-hellenistischer Exegeten. JSHRZ 3.2. Gutersloh: Mohn, 1975. . Fragmente judisch-hellenistischer Historiker. JSHRZ 1.2. Gutersloh: Mohn, 1976. . "Jewish-Greek Literature of the Greek Period." In The Cambridge History of Judaism. Volume Two: The Hellenistic Age, edited by W. D. Davies and L. Finkelstein, 385-408. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

301

—. "Judisch-hellenistische Literatur vor Philon von Alexandrien (unter Ausschluss der Historiker)." ANRW 11.20.1 (1987) 67-120. -. Poetische Schriften. JSHRZ 4.3. Gutersloh: Mohn, 1983. —. Der Thoraausleger Aristobulus. TU 86. Berlin: Akademie, 1964. Wardy, B. "Jewish Religion in Pagan Literature during the Late Republic and Early Empire." AA'filV II.19.1 (1979) 592-613. Weinreich, O. Gebet und Wunder Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1929. Wells, L. S. A. "The Books of Adam and Eve." In APOT 2:123-54. Wenschkewitz. H. Die Spiritualisierung der Kultus Begriffe. Leipzig: Pfeiffer, 1932. West, S. "Joseph and Asenath: A Neglected Greek Novel." CQ 68 (1974) 70-81. Whittaker, M. Jews atid Christians: Greco-Roman Views. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984. . "The Life of Adam and Eve." In The Apocryphal Old Testament, edited by H. F. D. Sparks, 141-67. Oxford: Clarendon, 1984. Wibbing, S. Die Tugend- und Laslerkataloge in Neuen Testament. Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1964. Wieneke, J. Ezechielis ludaei poetae Alexandrini fabulae quae inscribitur Exagoge fragmenta. Munster: Monasterii Westfalorum, 1931. Williams, D. S. "3 Maccabees: A Defense of Diaspora Judaism." JSP 13 (1995) 17-29. Williams, S. K. Jesus'Death as a Saving Event. Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1975. Willrich, H. "Der historische Kern des III. Makkabaerbuches." Hermes 39 (1904) 244-58. . Judaica. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1900. Wills, L. M. The Jew in the Court of the Foreign King: Ancient Jewish Court Legends. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990. . The Jewish Novel in the Ancient World. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1995. Wilson, W. T. The Mysteries of Righteousness: The Literary Composition and Genre of the Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides. Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1994. Winston, D. "Aristobulus from Walter to Holladay," Studia Philonica Annual 8 (1996) 155-66. . The Book ofWisdotn. AB 43. Garden City, N.Y: Doubleday, 1979. . Logos and Mystical Philosophy in Philo of Alexandria. Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College. 1985. . "Philo's Mysticism." The Studia Philonica Annual 8 (1996) 74-82. . "Was Philo a Mystic?" In Studies in Jewish Mysticism, edited by J. Dan and F. Talmage, 15-39. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1982. Wolfson, H. A. Philo: Foundations of Religious Philosophy in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. 2 vols. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1947. Wright, A. G. "The Structure of the Book of Wisdom." Bib 48 (1967) 165-84. Yarbro Collins, A. "Aristobulus." In OTP 2:831-42. . The Combat Myth in the Book of Revelation. HDR 9. Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1976. . "Numerical Symbolism in Jewish and Early Christian Apocalyptic Literature." In eadem. Cosmology and Eschatology in Jewish and Christian Apocalypticism, 55-138. Leiden: Brill, 1996. . "The Seven Heavens in Jewish and Christian Apocalypses." In eadem. Cosmology and Eschatology in Jewish and Christian Apocalypticism, 21-54. Leiden: Brill, 1996.

302

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Yavetz, Z. "Judeophobia in Classical Antiquity: A Different Approach." JJS 44 (1993) 122. Ziener, G. Die theologische Begrijfspmche im Buche der Weisheit. BBB 11. Bonn: Hanstein, 1956. Zuckerman, C. "Hellenistic Politeumata and the Jews: A Reconsideration." Scripta Classica Israelica 8-10 (1985-88) 171-85.

Index of Subjects

Abraham, 34-35, 39, 40, 42, 44-45, 4853, 55-57, 220-24, 236, 239, 248-51 Actium, 145 Adiabene, 262, 268 Agrippa, 137-38 agon motif, 208, 242 Alcimus, 69

Babylonian exile, 3 baptism, 106, 167, 211, 232 Bar Kochba, 148 Belial/Beliar, 146 Berossus, 30, 33, 49, 52 Buzyges, 170

Alexander the Great, 29, 41, 64-65, 67, 143 Alexander Polyhistor, 31 -32 Allegorists, 20-21 allegory, 187-90, 216. 236 Ananias, Jewish general, 70, 71 Andreas, 142

Caligula. 118-19, 125-28. 134, 151 canon, 20 Carthage, 86 Chelkias, 70 Cicero, 7, 8, 13, 164 circumcision, 8, 13, 55, 58-59, 160, 163, 167, 169, 183, 213, 230, 232, 234, 251, 255, 263, 268-70 Claudius, letter of, 12. 116, 119-21 Cleopatra II, 99-100, 123-24 Cleopatra III, 70, 72, 96, 100 Cleopatra V, 110, 111 Cleopatra VII, 85, 89, 145, 148, 152 competitive historiography, 30-31, 404 1 , 4 6 , 53 Cornelius, 264, 266 covenant form, 177-78 covenantal nomism, 21-22, 35, 79, 189, 192, 260. 273 Cumae, 83

animal cults, 42, 45, 158, 165, 192, 201 Antiochus III, the Great, 68, 86, l U n . Antiochus IV Epiphanes, 48. 69. 71, 76, 79, 89, 90, 91 Ai\tiochus VII Sidetes, 10, 59 anti-Semitism, II, 13 Aphrodisias, 267, 270 Apion, 10, 24, 119, 127, 129 apocalyptic literature, 22, 219, 224, 240, 247-60 ApoUonius Molon, 7, 10, 110 apologetics, 14-16, 261-72 Aristeas the exegete, 35-37 astrology, 42, 49, 162-64. 220. 222 Augustus, 114-16, 118-19, 134, 151

Cyrus of Persia, 92, 93, 95 Death, 249-50, 259

303

304

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

dietary laws, 13, 129, 160, 163, 206, 251 Dionysus, 38, 67-68, 122-23 dissonance, 14-15 divination, 163 Dositheus, son of Drimylus, 67, 68, 121, 123 Dositheus, general, 68, 109 Dualism, 182-83 elephantiasis, 39, 45 Elephantine, 3-4 Enoch, 49, 226, 240, 252-56 Erythrean sibyl, 83 Essene, 238 Ethiopia, 40-41, 61 Ethiopian wife of Moses, 34-35, 63, 22526 Euhemerism, 42, I63n. Exodus, 8, 35, 43, 45, 68, 198-200, 216, 224-30, 237 Ezra, 13 fiscus Judaicus, 139, 142 Flaccus, 118-19 Gerizim, 48, 52, 59 God-fearers, 173-74, 264-70, 274 gymnasium, 120-21 Hades, 73, 214, 244, 256 Hadrian, 142-43, 150-51 Hanukkah, 80-81 Hasmoneans, 17, 71, 77, 82-83, 101 Hecataeus of Abdera, 8-13, 29-30, 43, 52-53, 65, 155-56 Helenos son of Tryphon, 116-17 Heliodorus, 77, 83, 95, 123, 125 Heliopolis, 70, 71, 107 Hellenistic reform, 16 Heracles, 51, 52 Hermes, 41, 60 Herods, 17 Hezekiah, governor, 65-66 homosexuality, 158-60, 162, 165, 170, 183, 198 Horace, 8, 263 Horus, 90n.

Hyksos, 9-10, 90 Hyrcanus, John, 48, 58-60 Hyrcanus II, 70 Hyrcanus, Tobiad, 75, 76, 78 idolatry, 87, 105, 158-60, 162-63, 16567, 172, 183, 193, 195, 198-200, 231, 233-34, 237, 242, 252, 255-56, 258, 260, 270 immortality, 73, 105, 169, 206, 216, 22829, 232, 234-36, 245, 251 intermarriage, 23, 34-35, 104, 226, 23032, 238, 245 Isaac, binding of, 56-57 Isis, 41, 147, 196 Jason, reformer, 78 Jason of Cyrene, 78-79, 203 Jerusalem, 47, 54, 55, 71, 72, 76, 77, 8083, 95, 101-2, 110-11, 114n., 129, 130, 136-37, 149, 152, 194, 257-60, 270, 274 Job, 35-37 Jonathan of Cyrene, 140 Joseph, 40, 44, 104-10, 133, 176, 180, 230-40 Joseph, son of Tobias, 74-76 Josephus, 60-62 Judas Maccabee, 46, 79, 82 Julius Caesar, 7, 13, 70, 72, 113 Justus of Tiberias, 60, 61 Juvenal, 8 , 2 1 3 , 2 1 8 , 267, 270 king from Asia, 90 king from the sun, 88, 91-95, 162 laographia, 115-17, 122, 124-26 law, Jewish, 13, 20-23, 35, 43, 53, 5556, 59, 62, 83, 155-85, 199, 206-9, 222-23, 228-29, 246, 254 Leontopolis, 68-73, 80-82, 96, 101, 103, 107, 139, 147 Logos, 196, 213, 215-17, 219, 268 Lukuas, 142, 149 Maccabees, 89, 91, 92, 96, 97, 98, I12n. Macedonia, 86, 89

INDEX OF SUBJECTS Magic, 43 Magnesia, battle of, 86 Manetho. 9, 30-31, 33, 35, 40-41, 45, 52, 90 Melchizedek, 48, 148 Menelaus, 77 messiah, 91-92, 94n., 95, 134, 135, 137, 142-43, 147 Michael, 148, 249-50, 256, 258 Mithridates, 145 monotheism, 158, 166, 172, 174, 222, 231, 238, 259 Montanism, 241 Moses, "9, 10, 13, 19, 33-35, 39-45, 4647, 50, 56, 61, 63, 68, 155-58, 162-63, 189, 191, 193, 214-15. 220-30, 254, 269 Mosollamus, 157 Mousaeus. 41 mystery cult. 211-17, 226. 229, 233 Mysticism, 210-19 natural law. 162-63, 172-73, 199, 206 Nebuchadnezzar, 30, 41, 47, 93 Nektanebo, 30, 41 Nero, 138, 143-44, 146, 150-51, 166, 266, 269 Noachian laws, 170-71 Onias III, 69, 76-79, 82-83, 96 Onias IV, 4, 68-78, 81-82, 96, 97, 100101, 103, 107, 109, 152 Orpheus, 4 1 , 2 1 9 - 2 0 , 222-24 Osiris, 228 pattern of religion, 21. 260 Persian period. 92 Pharisees, 263 Philo of Alexandria, 5, 15, 20. 23, 114, 119, 121, 125-28, 131-38, 152, 16263, 169-71. 178, 182, 184, 201-2. 208, 211-19, 222, 229, 239-40, 260, 26364, 268, 2 7 1 , 2 7 4 Philo the Elder, 37 philanthropia, 202 Phoenicia. 48-49 Phoenicians, 47, 50

305

phoenix, 224-25, 228-29 Plato, 159, 189, 191, 214, 220, 224. 231 Politeuma. 114-16, 122, 139 Poppaea, 266, 269 Posidonius, 7 propaganda, 14-16, 261-72 proselytes, 231-32, 237 proselytism, 261-72 Ptolemy I Soter, 65, 66, 99 Ptolemy II Philadelphus, 98, 187 Ptolemy III Euergetes. 67, 74, 224 Ptolemy IV Philopator, 33. 38. 39, 6768, 122-24. 130 Ptolemy V Epiphanes, 74 Ptolemy VI Philometor, 68-71, 86, 89, 90, 96, 99-101, 110, 123, 158, 186-88 Prolemy VII Neos Philopator, 86 Ptolemy VIII Physcon, 70, 86, 89, 98101, 110, 123-25 Ptolemy IX Lathyrus, 70 Ptolemy XII Auletes, 111, 113 purity, 13 Pydna, 86 Quietus, Lusius, 141 Qumran. 18, 97, 175-78, 183, 232 Raphia, battle of, 39, 123 resurrection, 169-70, 206, 247 Rome, 8, 79, 86, 88, 112, 130, 134, 139, 142, 144-48, 150, 164, 262, 269, 275 sabbath, 8, 13, 65, 167, 169, 183, 190, 213, 251, 264. 267-70 Samaria, 49, 59 Satan, 241-44, 247 Schubart papyrus, 38 Scipio, 86 Semiramis, 30, 41, 44 Seneca, 8, 264, 268 Septuagint, 19-20, 31, 36-37, 48, 52, 97, 98, 101-3, 105, 169, 187, 203, 224, 228, 230, 241, 243, 274 Sesostris, 30, 41, 44 seventh king. 85-86. 88-90, 161 Shechem, 48, 58. 59 Sicarii, 24. 139-40, 142

306

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

Sidon, 47 Simon II, high priest, 69, 76, 96, 195 Sinai, 227-28 Solomon, 47, 50, 189 Son of Man, 148, 226 Sophia, 213, 215-19 Sparta, 79 spells. 56-57 sympathizers. 173, 231-32, 267, 269-70, 274 synagogue, 19, 141, 184 Tacitus, II, 271 Tell el-Yehoudieh, 72 temple, Jerusalem, 71, 72, 77, 80, 88. 91-93, 95, 96, 119. 122, 130, 139, 161-62, 164-66, 203, 216, 232 temple, Leontopolis, 69-73, 80-81, 101, 103, 107, 139, 147 temple, Tobiad, 76

Theophilus, 53 Therapeutae, 211-12, 232, 238, 246 Tiberius Julius Alexander, 15, 121, 13 138 Titans. 87 Titus, 139 Tobiads, 17, 74-77 tower of Babylon, 87 Trajan, 112, 137, 140, 143, 147, 274 lyphon, 9 TVre, 47 Varro, 13 Vespasian. 140, 151 wisdom literature, 22, 171, 182, 254 Zeno papyri, 16, 67, 75 Zeus, 164, 189, 192, 196, 226, 271

Index of Modem Authors

Barr, J., 29 Barraclough. R., 120, 131. 133, 134 Bartlett, J.. 94 Batiffol, R, 104 Baumstark, A., 164 Beauchamp, R, 198 Beavis, M. A. L., 193 Becker, J.. 175, 176, 182. 183, 184 Bell, H. I., 113 Berger, D., 11 Berger, K., 158, 162, 170, 178, 179 Berger, R, 2, 3 Bernays. J., 169, 191, 267 Bertram, G., 267 Bertrand, D. A., 246 Bickerman, E. J., 6, 20, 30, 31, 33, 59, 80, 81, 98, 101, 110, 111, 112, 114, 124, 164, 176, 187, 203, 204 Bidez, J., 94 Bilde, R, 2, 19, 24, 120, 193 Bimbaum, E., 131, 222 Bizzetti, R, 196 Bleeker, C. J., 235, 255 Boccaccini, G., 194 Bohak, G., 69, 70, 107, 108, 235 Bolkestein, H., 170 Bolz, N. W., 145 Borgen, R, 132, 180, 184 Bormann. L., 58 Bornkamm, G.. 214

Abel, F. M., 81 Abusch, R., 6 Amorai-Stark, S., 42 Andersen, F., 252 Anderson, B., 2 Anderson, G. A., 246 Anderson, H., 122, 124, 204 Applebaum, S., 4, 5, 24, 110. 115, 120, 140, 141, 142, 143 Arenhoevel, D., 81 Argyle, A. W., 255 Armstrong, A. H., 207 Arnim, H. F. A. von, 163, 181 Attridge, H. W., 18, 32, 33, 37, 44, 46, 47, 52, 54, 56, 61, 62, 78, 80, 158, 160, 191. 193, 219 Audet, J. R, 174 Aziza, C , 6 Baer, R. A., 244 Baltzer, K.. 22, 177, 178, 179 Barclay J. M. G., 4, 16, 19, 24, 38, 39, 40, 42, 45, 66, 84, 88, 89, 94, 108, 110, 121, 125, 126, 127, 130, 161, 169, 186, 190, 192, 200, 204, 225, 226, 229, 234, 238 Bardtke, H., I l l Bar-Kochva, B., 6, 9, 52, 53, 65, 66, 98, 101, 156, 157 Baron, S., 262, 263

307

308

INDEX OF MODERN AUTHORS

Borries, B. de, 158 Bottrich, C , 252, 254 Bousset, W., 212 Bowker, J., 2, 13, 23 Box, H., 118 Braun, M., 30, 31, 40, 41 Breitenstein, U., 199, 203, 205, 206 Bright, J., 3 Broek, R. van den, 229 Brooks, E. W., 104 Brooten, B. J., 173 Bull, R. J., 59 Bultmann, R., 182 Burchard, C , 104, 105, 175, 230, 233, 235, 236, 238 Burkert, W., 211, 223, 224 Burr, v., 131 Burstein, S. M., 30 Camponova, O., 94 Cancik, H., 83 Cardauns, B., 52 Carroll, R. R, 14 Casey, R. R, 214 Cerfaux, L., 38, 226, 229 Charles, R. H., 175, 248, 252, 253 Charlesworth, J. H., 31, 32, 42, 51, 58, 132, 163, 164, 253 Cheon, S., 197 Chester, A., 93, 96, 97, 149, 165 Chestnutt, R., 104, 105, 106, 109, 231, 232, 233, 237 Christ, R, 170 Coggins, R. J., 59 Cohen, S. J. D., 11, 19, 67, 114, 261, 263, 267 Collins, J. J., 12, 19, 22, 23, 29, 37, 49, 58, 84, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 96, 113, 121, 137, 143, 144, 145, 146, 148, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 171, 175, 196, 197, 199, 200, 201, 217, 226, 227, 241, 248, 249, 253, 264 Conzelmann, H., 180 Cowey, J., 115 Cowley, A., 4 Cross, R M., 20, 21 Crouch, J. E., 170, 171

Cumont, R, 94 Dalbert, R, 14, 32, 47 Dan, J., 215 Daniel, J. L., 6, 12, 13 Darnell, D. R., 212 Davies, R R., 17, 212 Davies, W. D., 6, 32, 66, 124 Dawson, D., 188, 190 Delcor, M., 18, 59, 71, 124, 197, 238, 241, 249, 251 Delia, D., 114 Delling, G., 105, 106, 158, 230 Del Tredici, K., 58 Denis, A.-M., 31, 32, 38, 51, 190, 220, 224, 246 Derron, P., 168, 171 Dexinger, E., 137 Diels, H., 39, 158 Dieterich, A., 223 Doran, R., 32, 33, 35, 46, 47, 48, 51, 52, 53, 78, 79, 80, 81, 83, 96 Dover, K. J., 159 Drews, R., 29 Droge, A. J., 38, 41, 43, 46, 47, 61 Duchesne, L., 104 Dupont-Sommer, A., 175, 203 Eddy, S. K., 30 Edelstein, L., 7 Eltester, W., 176 Emmet, C. W., 122, 123, 124, 125, 128 Engberg-Pedersen, T., 19 Engel, H., 196 Enns, R, 198 Eppel, R., 180 Ewald, H., 125 Fallon, R, 46, 57, 58, 227 Reldman, L. H., 5, 6, 13, 16, 18, 61, 62, 12, 157, 262, 263, 265, 267, 270 Festinger, L., 14, 15, 16 Fiensy, D. A., 212 Finkelstein, L., 6, 32, 66, 124 Rischer, T , 80 Rischer, U., 73, 135, 136, 170, 203, 206, 237, 252, 256

INDEX OF MODERN AUTHORS Fishbane, M., 226 Flusser, D., 16, 42 Foakes Jackson, F. J., 265 Frankfurter, D., 94, 142 Fraser, R M., 9, 19, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 38, 39, 40, 52, 54, 58, 66, 68, 73, 86, 89, 90, 98, 99, 100, 109, 123, 156, 188, 224. 225 Frerichs, E. S., 19, 67, 114, 133, 164. 267 Friedlander, M., 14 Fritz, K. von, 194 Fruchtel, U., 137 Fruedenthal, J., 31, 32, 33, 35, 36, 37, 38, 4 3 , 5 1 , 5 4 , 58, 204, 205 Fuks, A., 4, 66, 113, 141, 142 Gabba, E., 6, 10 Gafni, I. M., 136 Gager, J. G., 6, 8, 9, 12, 13, 15, 63, 156, 157 Garrett, S. R., 245 Gaylord, H. E., 255 Geertz, C., 2 Geffcken, J., 49, 88, 89, 145, 151 Georgi, D., 14, 50, 160, 184, 195, 213, 222, 223, 262. 264, 269 Giblet, J., 46 Gigante, M., 115 Gilbert, M., 196. 199 Ginzberg, L., 170 Goldenberg, R., 268 Goldstein, J.. 74, 76, 77, 78, 102 Goodenough, E., 133, 134, 194, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 222, 226, 229, 240 Gooding, D. W., 102 Goodman, M., 4, 6, 14, 32, 33, 35, 37, 39, 46, 47, 51, 52, 53, 54, 58, 66, 85, 86, 87, 98, 105. 110. 115, 124, 125. 143, 145, 168, 186, 191, 204, 220, 225, 241, 248, 249, 252, 256, 261, 263, 270, 271 Goodrick, A. T S., 197, 198, 199 Gorg, M., 201 Green, W. S., 133 Greenfield, J. € . , 252

309

Gregoire, F., 135 Grelot, R, 197 Griffiths, J. G., 94 Gruen, E., 9, 10, 14, 15, 17, 20, 24, 32, 33, 34, 35, 38, 44, 46, 47, 48, 51, 52, 54, 58, 69, 70, 71, 72, 75, 82, 84, 85, 86, 90, 93, 94, 103, 105, 106, 109, 117, 124, 126, 128, 131, 145, 146. 161, 187, 188, 193, 194, 226, 228, 261, 271 Gruenwald, I., 227 Guthrie, W. K. C., 223 Gutman, Y., 32, 54, 55, 56, 57 Guttmann, M., 170 Haas, C., 242 Haase. W., 6 Habicht, C., 74, 80, 81 Hadas, M., 97, 98, 100, 101, 102, 103, 122, 123, 124, 125, 130, 192, 194, 203, 204, 205 Hadot, R, 194 Hage, W., 255 Hamerton-Kelly, R., 21. 234 Hannestad, L.. 19 Hanson, J., 33 Happold, K C., 210 Harlow, D. C , 255, 256 Harnack, A. von, 263 Harrelson, W., 179 Hata, G., 263 Hay, D. M., 211 Hayes, J. H., 3 Hayward, R., 69 Hecht, R. D., 133, 137 Hegermann, H., 66 Heinemann, I., 205 Hellholm, D., 83, 94, 141, 248 Heckel, U., 93 Hengel, M., 16, 18, 20, 32, 34, 38, 39, 43, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51. 52, 58, 59, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 93, 99, 103, 141, 142, 144, 148, 149, 188, 194. 219 Henten, J. W. van, 6, 115. 203, 204, 2Q6, 208 Hentschel, G., 196, 201 Hillers, D., 22

310


Himmelfarb, M., 253, 257 Hody, H., 98 Holladay, C. R., 24, 32, 33, 35, 37, 39, 40, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 51, 52, 53, 54, 56, 57, 58, 60, 186, 188, 190, 192, 193, 220, 221, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227 Hollander, H. W., 175, 176, 179 Holtz, T., 105 Honigman, S., 67 Horbury, W., 66, 67, 70, 72, 73, 96, 121, 148, 149, 165 Horna, K., 171 Horsley, R. A., 200 Horst, P. W. van der, 73, 115, 163. 168, 169, 171, 172, 173, 227, 228, 241, 242, 245, 246 Howard, G., 103 HUbener, W., 145 Hubner, H., 196, 197 Hughes, H. M., 255, 256 Hultgard, A., 175 Humphrey, E. M., 235, 236 Humphreys, W. L., 3 Jacob, B., I l l Jacobs, I., 242 Jacobson, H., 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229 Jacoby, R, 31, 46, 51 James, M. R., 241, 249 Janowitz, N., 193 Janssen, E., 249 Jellicoe, S., 19, 20, 98, 101, 102 Jenks, G. C., 146 Jeremias, J., 104, 106, 109, 137, 232, 233 Johnson, M. D., 246, 248 Jonge, H. J. de, 203 Jonge, M. de, 175, 176, 180 Juster, J., 113, 185 Kahle, R, 19, 102 Kappelmacher, A., 225, 227 Karpeles, G., 57 Kasher, A., 4, 5, 17, 65, 66, 68, 70, 71, 72, 81, 99, 113, 116, 117, 120, 121, 122, 123, 141

Kee, H. C , 175, 176, 183, 238, 239, 245 Keller, R., 221 Kellermann, U., 74, 204 Kerenyi, K., 231 Kern, O., 221 Kerst, R., 172 Kidd, I. G., 7 Kiel, v., 69 Kilpatrick, G. D., 232 Kippenberg, H. G., 47, 48, 51, 52, 58, 59, 145 Kilpatrick, G. D., 104, 109 Klauck, H. J., 204, 205, 206 Klein, G., 171 Knibb, M. A., 241, 242 Koester, H., 200 Kohier, K., 212, 241 Kohut, G. A., 241 Kolarcik, M., 196 Kolenkow, A. B., 248, 250 Kooij, A. van der, 70 Kraabel, A. T , 4, 265, 267 Kraeling, C. H., 4 Kraeling, E. G., 4 Kraemer, R. S., 104, 105, 106, 230, 235 Kraft. R. A., 240 Kranz, W., 158 Kreitzer, L., 146 Kroll, W., 159 Kuchler, M., 170, 171, 174, 176 Kudlien, R, 169 Kugel, J. L., 20 Kuhn, H. W., 236 Kuhn, K. G., 104, 232, 264, 265, 270 Kuiper, K., 224, 227 Kuntzmann, R., 85 Kurfess, A., 151 Lafarque, M., 220, 221 Lagrange. M. J., 141 Lake, A., 214 Lake, K., 265, 266 Lake, S., 214 Lanchester, H. C. O., 92 Lane, E. N., 262 Lapp, R W., 76 Laquer, R., 51

INDEX OF MODERN AUTHORS Larcher, C , 196, 201 Layton, B., 246 Lease, G., 210, 211 Lebram, J. H. C , 205 Lemke, W. E., 21 Leon, H. J., 4 Levine, A.-J., 105 Levison, J. R., 6, 18, 62 Lewis, J. J., 194 Licht, H., 159 Liebermann, S., 165 Lietzmann, H., 72 Lifshitz, B., 266, 270 Lloyd-Jones, H., 54, 57 Long, A. A., 207 Lovering, E., 133 Luckmann, T., 2 Luderitz, G., 115, 120 Ludwich, A., 57

Mach, M., 227 Mack., B. L., 201 MacLennan, R. J., 265, 266, 267 MacRae, G., 106 Marcus, R., 266 Martin, R. A., 249 Mays, J. L„ 204 Mazar, B., 76 McGinn, B., 146, 2 1 1 , 2 1 4 McKnight, S., 14, 261. 262 Meecham, H. O., 97 Meeks, W. A., 4, 227, 229 Meisner, N., 97. 99, 101 Mendels, D., 30, 46 Mendelson, A., 121, 131, 161, 202 Mendenhall, G., 22 Merentitis, K. I., 37, 38 Merkel, H., 84, 86, 96, 143, 145 Merkelbach, R., 231 Michaelis, W., 182 Milik, J. T , 252 Millar, R, 4, 32, 66, 87, 115, 168, 185, 186, 220 Miller, J. M., 3 Miller, R M., 21 Modrzejewski, J. M., 4, 5, 64, 66, 67,

311

71, 114, 115, 116, 117, 120, 121, 138, 140,141 Moehring, H. R., 18, 61 Momigliano, A., 6, 29, 31, 71, 80. 88, 89, 90, 93, 94, 98 Moore, C. A., 18, 110, 111, 123 Moore, G. F., 232 Mor, M., 1 7 , 7 1 , 102, 2 6 1 , 2 6 2 Morfill, W, R., 253 Motzo, B., 124 Moule, C. E D., 199 Mowinckel, S., 148 Mras, K., 32, 56 Mueller, U. B., 149 Murray O., 194 Mussies, G., 16, 41 Musurillo, H., 117, 120, 140, 142 Nagel, M., 246 Neusner, J., 3, 18, 30, 61, 74, 133, 146, 149, 164. 200, 227, 239, 240, 267 Nickelsburg, G. W., 54, 58, 82, 85, 94, 124, 177. 179, 197, 236, 246, 248, 249, 257, 258 Niebuhr, K.-W., 169, 170, 173, 176, 254 Nikiprowetzky, V., 49, 85, 87, 88, 89, 91, 93, 162, 163, 164, 166 Nilsson, M., 158, 163. 211, 217, 223 Nissen, A., 184 Nock, A. D., 210, 231 Nolland, J., 91, 92, 263 Norden, E., 204 Nordheim, E. von, 177, 241 Novak, D., 170 Noy, D., 66, 67, 70, 72, 73, 121 Odeberg, H., 252 Oded, B., 3 O'Neill, J. C., 148 Orlinsky, H. M., 20, 98, 102 0stergard, U., 2 Overman, J. A., 265, 266, 267, 268 Parente. R, 69, 72, 96, 123, 124, 125, 126 Parke, H. W., 83, 84 Parsons, E, 54, 57

312


Paul, A., 85, 122, 125 Peerbolte. L. C. L., 146 Pelletier, A., 97 Pennington, A., 252 Peretti, A., 49, 188 Perry, B. E., 231 Pervo, R. I., 40, 106, 122, 230 Petrie, R, 70 Pfister, E., 164 Pfitzner, V. C , 208, 242 Philonenko, M., 104. 105, 106, 175, 230, 231, 232, 233, 235, 238, 239, 246, 252 Picard, J. C , 255, 256, 258, 259 Pines, J., 255 Places, E. des, 196 Poorthuis, M., 102 Porten, B., 4 Potter, D. S.. 151 Preisendanz, K., 240 Prijs, L., 137 Pucci Ben Zeev, M., 9, 53, 65 Pummer, R., 58 Purvis, J. D., 48, 59 Qimron, E., 25 Rabin, C , 18 Rad, G. von, 181 RahnenfUhrer, D., 241 Rajak, T . 17, 61, 114, 267 Rampolla, C , 204 Rappaport, U., 17, 123 Redditt, R L., 206 Redmond, J. A., 166 Reese, M., 195 Reider, J., 195, 201 Renehan, R., 205 Rengstorff, K. H„ 176 Reynolds, J. M., 267 Riecken, H. W., 15 Riedweg. C., 220 Riess, E., 163 Riessler, P., 104 Robert, L., 267 Robertson, R. G., 224, 225 Rohde, E., 223

Rooden, R T. van, 203 Rubinstein, A., 252 Ruiten, S. van, 70 Rupport, L., 197 Rutgers, L., 4 Safrai, S., 3, 5, 6, 16, 18. 102, 115, 120, 130, 268 Sanders, E. R, 21, 23. 234, 248, 249, 251, 273 Sanders, J. A., 2 Sanger, D., 105, 109, 231, 237, 238 Savignac, J. de, 135 Scaliger, J., 224 Schachter, S., 15 Schafer, R, 6, 10, 11, 12, 221 Schaller, B., 241, 246 Schaper, J., 137 Schiffman, L. H.. 263 Schlosser. J., 85 Schmidt. R, 248 Schmidt, L., 170 Schnabel, R. 49 Schurer, E., 4, 6, 16, 17, 18, 32, 33, 35, 37, 39, 46, 47, 51, 52, 53, 54, 58, 66, 85, 86, 87, 98, 105, 110, 115, 124, 125, 140, 143, 145, 168, 185, 186, 190, 191, 204, 220, 225, 241, 247, 248, 249, 252, 256 Schwartz, D., 102 Schwartz, E.. 31 Schwier, H., 93 Scott, J. M., 133, 137, 143 Scott, W., 151 Scroggs, R., 21, 234 Sedley, D. N., 207 Segal, J. B., 225 Sevenster, J. N., 6, 12 Shinan, A., 61 Shutt, R. J. H., 97, 98 Siegert, R. 172, 265, 266, 268, 269 Sievers, J., 69 Simon, M., 84, 161, 165. 166 Sly, D., 245 Smallwood, E. M., 12, 113, 115, 118, 120, 127, 128, 131, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 146, 263, 269

INDEX OF MODERN AUTHORS Smith, J. Z., 239, 240 Smith, M., 210 Snell, B., 225 Sparks. H. R D., 180, 241, 246, 248, 252, 255 Spencer, S., 210 Spittler, R. R, 240, 241, 246 Standhartinger, A., 58, 104, 105, 106 Steck, O. H., 22 Stegemann, H., 264, 265, 270 Stendahl, K., 104, 232 Sterling, G. E., 9, 15, 24. 29. 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 38, 40, 41, 46, 47, 49, 53, 54, 61 Stem, M., 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 16, 18, 52, 53, 76. 114, 115, 120, 130, 155, 157. 262, 264, 268, 269 Stone, M. E., 32, 54, 61, 78, 84, 124, 149, 175, 196, 241, 246, 247, 248 Stowers, S. K., 204, 205 Strugneil, J., 2 5 , 3 1 , 3 9 , 225 Sweet, J. R M., 199 Talmage, E, 215 Talmon, S.. 20 Tannenbaum, R., 267 Tara, W. W., 39, 145, 194 Taylor, J. E., 69, 70, 212 Tcherikover, V., 4, 5, 14, 16, 17, 60, 66, 67, 71, 74, 76, 77, 96. 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 113. 116, 117, 119, 120, 121. 123, 124, 125, 128, 129, 130, 131, 143, 194 Theisohn, J., 149, 226 Thomas, J., 166, 168, 169, 176 Thompson, D.-J., 114 Thorahill, R., 240 Thyen, H., 182, 205 Tiede, D. L., 37, 40, 4 1 , 4 3 Tov, E., 20 Tramontano, R., 97 Trebilco, R, 4 Trencsenyi-Waldapfel, I., 225, 227, 228 Troiani, L., 10 Tromp, J. 122, 123, 124, 163 Turcan, R., 231

313

Turner, N., 248 Ulrichsen, J. H., 175, 176 Unnik, W. C. van, 176 Vaillant, A., 252 Verbmgghe, G. R. 30, 31 Vermes, G.. 4, 32. 49. 66, 110, 115, 168, 186, 220, 247, 248, 249, 252 Vervenne, M., 70 Vogel, C. J. de, 207 Vogt, E., 224 Vogtle, A., 180 Volz, R, 137 Voss, M. H. van, 41 Wacholder, B. Z.. 29, 31, 32, 33, 34, 38, 39, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50. 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 57, 58, 60 Wagner, S., 241 Walbank, R W., 31 Walla, M., 228, 229 Wallace, S. L., 117, 124 Walter, N., 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 41, 46, 47, 48, 49, 51, 52, 53, 54, 58, 168, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 220, 221 Wardy, B., 8 Weinreich, O., 43 Wells, L. S. A., 246, 247, 248 Wenschkewitz, H., 137 Werblowski, R. J. Z., 255 Wesselius, J. W., 204 West, S., 106, 230 White, R. T., 17 Whittaker, M., 6, 246 Wibbing, S., 180 Wichersham, J. M., 30, 31 Wieneke, J., 224, 225, 229 Wilken, R. L., 4 Williams, D. S., 129 Williams. S. K., 208 Willrich, H., 43, 76, 125 Wills, L. M., 45, 74, 78, 106, 110, 122, 230, 231 Wilson, W. T , 168, 171 Winston, D., 187, 195, 196, 197, 199, 201, 202, 214, 215, 250

314


Wolfson, H. A., 15, 20, 133, 135, 136, 197, 214, 215 Woods, R., 210 Wright, A. G., 196

Yarbro Collins, A., 85, 146, 186. 252

Yardeni, A., 4 Yavetz, Z., 12 Zahle, J., 19 Zenger, E., 196, 201 Ziener. G., 198 Zuckerman, C , 115, 120

Index of Ancient Literature

HEBREW BIBLE Genesis 10 12 14 25:1-3 (LXX) 25:6 (LXX) 30:6 30:11 32 33:18 (LXX) 34 36:33 (LXX) 45:26

64, 236 198 50 49 34 34 108 108 239 48 58 35, 36 230

Numbers 24:7 (LXX)

135, 137

Deuteronomy 6:4 26:13b-14 30:15 32:21 (LXX)

136, 178 172 181 182 257

Joshua 3:15

102

7 Samuel 12:3

181

11-19 15:23-25 16:31 23:5 28:4-5 Leviticus 20:26

237 19 201 227 198 227 235 169 107

136, 164 12

1 Kings 11

64

Isaiah 1:16 1:26 19:18-22 19:19 19:19 (LXX) 41:2 41:25 44:9-20

17:5-8 26:20-23 29:7 41^4 41:16 44:1

315

181 64 3 3 3 64

Ezekiel 181 206 13 13

Hosea 2:8 2:22

167 70 107 69 69 93 93 200

93 144 236

Jeremiah

18:5-9 37 40^8 44:9

2 Samuel

7 Exodus 3:14 (LXX) 4:22-23 7:1

44:28 47:8 62:4

233 233

Joel 3:3 4:2

91 91

Zechariah 2:15 (LXX)

236

316

INDEX OE ANCIENT LITERATURE

Malachi 3:16 (LXX)

266

Psalms 1:6 2 24 46:4 48 48:2 79:4 79:10 115:9-11 (LXX) 118:2-4 (LXX) 135:19-20 (LXX) 137:4

182 95 181 55 95 55 3 3 266 266 266 1

Job 31:16-18 38-41 42:15 42:17a (LXX) 42:17 (LXX)

181 36 246 37, 242 36

Proverbs 4:10-14 8:22 9 9:2-5

22 182 56 182 235

Qoheleth

22

Esther (LXX)

17, 45, 128 18, 22, 110-12, 123 10:3L (LXX, colophon) no A6 111 ElO 112 E14 114 Daniel 1-6 2-6 7 9 9:4b-13

17, 20, 118 45,

no 96 148 91 22

9:26 11:22 11:34

69 69 89

Ezra 9.2

13

Nehemiah 9

22

10:18 10:20-21 13:4-7

233 233 181

Hebrews

2 Chronicles 5:6 (LXX)

266

NEW TESTAMENT Matthew 3:10 23:15

134 263

Luke 3:9

134

John 6 6:51 15

235 105 134

Acts 10 13:16 13:26 13:43 13:44 13:50 16:14 17:4 17:17 18:7

267 264 264 264 266 185 185 264 264 266 264

185, 185, 185,

185, 185, 264,

Romans 1 1:26 1 Corinthians 8:6

162, 200 173

172

n-12

180

Revelation 13 13:3 16:12 17 17:8 17:11 18 21

144 146 93 144 146 146 144 237

APOCRYPHA Tobit 3:1-6

22

Wisdom of Solomon 24, 26, 195-202, 206, 219, 271 197 1-5 1:1-6:21 196, 197 1:4 197, 250 202 1:6 1:13-14 201 2:1 197 2:10 200 2:11 197 2:12 199, 200 2:13 198, 236 2:13-20 201 2:16 198, 236 236 2:18 2:22 197, 216 3:2 236 3:4 198 199 3:16 4:3 199 5:5 197, 236 198 5:6-7

317

INDEX OF ANCIENT LITERATURE 5:15 5:17 6:3 6:4 6:17-20 6:22 6:22-9:18 6:22-11:1 7:15 7:17-18 7:22-24 7:22-8:1 7:23 7:25-29 7:27 8:1 8:13 10 10-19 10:4 10:5 10:6 10:10 10:15 11-19 11:21-26 11:23-24 12:3-4 12:19 12:27 13 13-15 13:1 13:1-9 13:10 13:10-19 14:12-31 14:16-20 14:22-29 14:23 14:26 15:17 15:18-19 16:2 16:3 16:5 16:10

198 198 195 199, 200 197 216 196 196 216 198 196 196 202 216 196 196 216 198 195, 198, 216 201 201 201 201 201 202 250 202 202 201 198 162, 201 144,199 199 200 42 200 200 195 199 199 199 198 200 201 201 201 201

16:21 16:24 16:26 18:2 18:5 18:6 18:9 18:13 18:24 19:13-14

201 198 201 201 199 201 200, 201 201 202 202

Ben Sira 24 24:8-12 24:19-22 24:20 24:23 50:24 50:26

195 200 240 235 236 56, 223 101 49

1 Maccabees 2:2 6:43-46 8 8:17-18 10:30 10:38 11:8-19 11:28 11:34 12 12:19-23 14:24 15:16-21

77. 78, 98 82 82 79 46 98 98 78 98 98 79 52 47 5

2 Maccabees

18, 63, 74, 76, 77-83, 96, 111, 123, 124, 152, 203, 206 79, 80 81 80 69, 187 81 83, 95 77, 78, 79 203

1:1-9 1:7 1:9 1:10 2:18 3 3:1 3:5

3:11 3:33 3:35-40 4:2 4:5 4:11 4:18-20 4:33-34 4:34 4:37 5:12 5:19 6:1-6 6:7-8 6:18

77, 78 77 79 77 77 46, 79 47 69 77 77 79 79 59 38, 68 203

7 7:38

207 79

8:15 8:22

79 82

9:13-18 10:4 10:19-20 12:40 13:15 14:15-18 14:24 15:11-16

79 79 82 79 82 82 79 82

PSEUDEPIGRAPHA Apocalypse of Abraham Apocalypse Moses 5-8 13 15-29 21:6 30:1 32 37:5 39:2

222, 242

of 246-48 247 247 247 247 247 247 247 247

318 Ascension 4:1 2 Baruch 4:5 36-40 3 Baruch

1:2 1:3 2:3 2:7 3:5 4 4:17 4-9 8:5 11-15 16 16:2

INDEX OF ANCIENT LITERATURE of Isaiah 146 21 222 144 26, 249, 25559, 260, 272, 273, 274 257, 258 258 256 256 256 255, 258 257, 258 256 257, 258 255 259 257

1 Enoch 8 37-71 48:10 90:8

49 164 148, 226 149 69

2 Enoch

26, 240, 248, 249, 252-55, 256, 257, 259, 272 252 , 254 254 253 254 254 254 253 252 254 253

3-37 24-30 33:6-7 39-55 44:1 44:2 58 58-63 59:3 65 65-66 4 Ezra 3:13-14

21, 149 222

7:29 9:38-10:56 10:27 10:44 11-12 13:1-4

149 237 257 257 144 149

Joseph and Aseneth 10310,214,219, 230-39, 241, 245, 2 5 1 , 2 6 7 1-21 108, 230 1:5 234 1:9 238 8 233 8:5 105, 231 232, 266 8:5-6 266 8:9 237 10:18-20 237 12-13 237 12:1-2 237 12:2-3 237 12:11 234 13:10 14-17 107, 235, 239 14:8 236 15:4 105, 232 15:6 236 15:7 107 16-17 232 16:7 235 16:8 105 16:16 105, 232 16:17-23 107 19:5 105, 232 21:3 236 21:21 105, 232 22 237 22:3 232 22-29 107, 108, 109, 234 23-29 238 23:9 108 23:12 108 24:9 108 24:13 108 25:6 108

28-29 28:13

179 108

Jubilees 7:20 7:28 12:12 12:17 12:60

91 171 171 242 164 42

Letter of Aristeas 19, 26, 97-103, 124, 152, 191-95, 271, 272 3 194 6 36 12-14 4, 66 14 100 16 192 28 98 29-32 102 36 99 37 99, 100 57 103 96-99 194 99 216 102 98 116 101 121 194 122 103, 194 130 193 130-65 193 130-68 192 132 172 136 225 137 193 140 193 148 100 166-67 100 168 192 201 98 225-30 179 310 115 312-16 191 Life of Adam and Eve

246-48

INDEX OF ANCIENT LITERATURE 247 247 247 247 247 247 247

1-11 9-11 12-17 25-29 30-34 40-42 48:3 3 Maccabees

1 1:3 2:2-20 2:28 2:29-30 2:30 2:33 3:3 3:3-7 3:8-10 3:12 3:33 4:1 5:31 6:3 6:6 6:9 6:15 7:1 7:10-16 7:11-12 7:19 4 Maccabees 1:1-12 1:10 1:11 1:13-3:18 1:15-17 1:33-34 2:14 3:19 4:9 4:20

100, 109, 112, 117, 121, 122-31. 132, 134, 152, 273 67 15 22 122, 124 38, 67, 123 125 129 128 129 68, 126 124 129 128 128 130 124 127 130 124 129 129 130 26, 178,

202-9, 273, 274 205 205 207, 208 205 206 206 179 205 203 203

4:25-26 5:4 5:33-36 6:10 6:16 6:18-21 7:9 7:18 9:9 9:30 14:9 15:3 17:8 17:11-14 17:12-16 17:17-24 18:5 18:6-19 18:23

206 203 207 208 207 207 207 207 206 207 203 206 205, 206 208 208 208 206 206 206

Prayer of Joseph 239-40 Origen, Commentary on John 2:31 239 Philocalia 23.15 23.19

239 239

Pseudo-Philo Book of Biblical Antiquities 18:5 222 Sibylline Oracles 24, 72, 136, 168, 183, 184, 186, 224, 271 2 145 25, 83-97, 1603 65, 166, 274 3:1-45 167, 191, 222 3:1-92 84 167 3:11 3:11-12 172 167 3:15 144 3:30-33

3:46-62 3:63-74 3:75-92 3:93-96 3:97 3:97-155 3:97-294 3:97-349 3:105-55 3:156-61 3:161 3:162-95 3:175-95 3:179-90 3:182-90 3:190 3:192-93 3:193 3:194 3:194-95 3:218 3:218-30 3:218-36 3:218-47 3:220-28 3:247 3:255-58 3:261 3:265-85 3:265-94 3:275-79 3:283-84 3:286 3:286-94 3:287 3:288-89 3:295-488 3:318 3:319-20 3:350-80 3:350-488 3:401-88 3:489-829 3:545-55 3:545-72 3:550 3:551-54

319 145 146 145 84 84, 145 87 85 85 87 86, 87 87 86 88 86 160 86 85 85 89 89 222 42 42, 49 162 163 163 162 163 91 91 162 162 92 91 91 91 85 85, 89 147 85, 145, 146 85 83 85 160 161, 162, 271 162 163

320 3:573-600 3:591-93 3:597-98 3:599-600 3:601-18 3:608 3:608-9 3:624-34 3:652 3:652-56 3:657-68 3:702-3 3:705 3:708-9 3:732-40 3:757-58 3:762-66 4 4:8-11 4:27-30 4:116 4:118 4:119-24 4:130-35 4:138 4:138-39 4:140-51 4:165 5

5:1-11 5:1-51 5:6-7 5:33-34 5:34 5:46-50 5:51 5:52-59 5:52-110 5:75-79 5:75-85 5:77-85 5:93 5:101 5:108 5:111-36

INDEX OF ANCIENT LITERATURE 162 164 162 160, 162 90 85 85, 90 161 88, 91, 94 92 95 95 95 95 95 164 160 166-67 166 166 166 166 166 166 166 166 166 106, 232 143-50. 152, 161, 165, 166, 203, 259, 274 151 143, 150, 151 166 166 146 144 150 144 143, 144 165 165 144 146 146 148, 149 146

5:111-78 5:138 5:139-40 5:143 5:147 5:150 5:158-59 5:159 5:160-61 5:166 5:173 5:174 5:179-285 5:206-13 5:251 5:252 5:256 5:256-59 5:257 5:264 5:264-85 5:268 5:278-80 5:286-327 5:286-434 5:353-56 5:367 5:386-97 5:398-410 5:398-413 5:403-5 5:406-7 5:414 5:414-19 5:420-32 5:422 5:424-25 5:425 5:430 5:435-530 5:484-88 5:484-91 5:487 5:495-96 5:500-507 5:512-31 8:1-216

143 146 146 144 146 165 148 144 144 144, 165 144 148 143, 144 147 149 149 148, 149 144, 148 148 149 149 149 165 146 143 165 146 165 165 144 165 165 148 149 257 149 149 149 149, 165 143 147 144 144 165 165 144 150

8:52-59 8:65-74 8:131-38 11 11:61-79 12-13 12-14 12:1-11 13 14 Fl-3 Fl:7 Fl:7-8 FI:20-22 Fl:32 F3:3 F5:l

151 150 150 145, 150, 151 147 146 151 151 151 151 167 167 172 167 167, 172 167, 172 167

Testament of Abraham 17, 126, 222, 241, 248-51, 255, 257, 259, 260, 272, 273 Recension A I 249 1-15 249 8 249 10 250 10:1 249 14 250 16-20 249 Testament of Asher 1:3-8 2:9 4:5

177 182 183 183

Testament of Benjamin 4:2 6

176 179 181

Testament of Dan

176

Testament of Gad

176

Testament of Job

36,

321

INDEX OF ANCIENT LITERATURE

1:3 2-27 4:4-9 7 9-15 17 17:1 18 18:6-7 20:5 23 24-26 27:10 2 8 ^ 28:8 32 35-38 39 40 41 43:5 45 46-47 46-50 46-53 47:3

126, 208, 219, 240-46, 247, 248, 251, 272 242 242 242 243, 244 245 243 241 243 242 243 243 44 242 243 241 243 243 244 244 244 244 245 57 244 241, 246 244

Testament of Joseph 180 2:4-10:3 180 2:7 3-9 179, 180 178 10-17 180 10:1 180 10:2-3 10:5-20:6 179 18:1-2 178 Testament of Issachar 4:2-6 181 5:2 179 179 7:6

106 226 233 176

4:6 8 8:4-5 17:11 Testament of Moses 3:1 Testament of Naphtali 5:8

17, 183

17 177

Rule) 22

4QMMT

176 181 179 179, 180 178, 180 180 179 180 180 180 180 178 178

Testament of Simon 2:5-5:3

176 180

Testament 5:1 6:4 6:7 7:2 8:1

179 179 179 179 179

ofZebulun

Treatise ofShem

42, 163

DEAD SEA SCROLLS IQH

(Hodayot)

IQIsa

Scroll)

236 148 69

25

4QWords of the Luminaries 1:8-7:2 22 llQMelchizedek Genesis Apocryphon

Testament of Reuben 2-3 3:10 3:10-4:5 3:11-15 4:1-5 4:6-6:5 4:8 5:1-7 6:1 6:9 6:10-12

IQM (War Testament of Levi

93

IQS (Community I:24b-2:1

148 49

HELLENISTIC JEWISH AUTHORS Acts of the Alexandrian Martyrs 117, 140, 142 Aristeas the Exegete

3537

Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica 9.25.1-4 35 Aristobulus 186-90 Clement, Stromateis I 186 1.150.1 186 5 186 6 186 Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica 7.14 186 8.10 186 8.10.5 188 13.12 186,219 13.12.2 187 13.12.7 192 13.12.9 213,216 13.I2.9-I0 189 13.12.11 56 13.12.13 213 13.13.34-35 190

322


Eusebius, Historia Ecclesiastica 7.32.16-18

186

Artapanus 37-46 Clement, Stromateis 1.23.154, 2-3 37 Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica 9.18 9.23 9.27 9.27.2 9.27.4 9.27.6 9.27.7 9.27.12 9.27.20 38, 39, 9.27.23-26 9.27.24-27 9.27.32 Boule

Papyrus

37 37 37 45 43 43 39 42 45 43 38 41 117

Cleodemus

Malchus 5152 Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica 9.20.2-4 51 Josephus, Antiquities 1.15 §§239-41

51

Demetrius the Chronographer 33-35 Clement, Stromateis 1.141.1-2 33 1.141.8 33 Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica 9.19.4 9.21.1-3 9.29.1-19 9.29.15 9.29.16c

33 33 33 33 33

Eupolemus 46-47 Clement, Stromateis 1.130.3 46 1.141.4 46 1.141.4-5 46 1.153.4 46 Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica 9.26.1 9.30.1-34.8 9.34.20 9.39.2-5

46 46 46 46

Ezekiel the Tragedian 222, 224-30 Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica 9.28 224 9.29.254-69 224 29.4-16 224 Josephus Against Apion 31 1.1 61 1.186-87 4 1.191 3 1.205-11 65 1.209-12 6 I.2I6-18 §23 61 1.218 53 1.288-320 10 1.304-11 11 2.1-7 10 2.29-32 127 2.34 127 2.35 4, 65 2.37 113 2.38 116 .2.41 127 '2.48 12 2.49 68 2.50-52 70 2.51-56 100 2.53-55 123 2.61 126 2.65 25, 121, 129

2.66 2.68-70 2.79 2.92-96 2.112-14 2.147 2.148 2.190-219 2.199 2.202 2.210 2.215 2.255-58 §36 2.282

127 127 7 11 6 7 10 170 170 170 19 170 62 268

Antiquities Proem 1,4 §24 200 Proem 3 §14 62 Proem 4 §24 62 1.1.4 §18 62 1.7.1-8.2 §§154-68 61 1.8.2 §§167-68 42 1.10.2 §180 48 2.10.1-2 §§238-53 61 11.1.3 §8 3 11.8.6 §344 48 11.185-295 61 12.1.1 §3 65 12.1.1 §§4-7 65 12.1.1 §§5-6 6 12.1.1 §§7-10 49 12.1.1 §8 65 12.1.5 §§180-85 75 12.3.1 §121 139 12.3.3 §§138-44 114 12.4.1 §154 74 12.4.1-11 §§154-234 17 12.4.1 §158 74 12.4.10 §224 75 12.4.10 §§226-27 52 12.4.11 §§228-34 76 12.4.11 §229 76, 77 12.4.11 §§234-36 77 12.5.5 §§257-64 48, 59 12.9.7 §387 69 12.9.7 §§387-88 69 13.3.1 §62 69

323

INDEX OF ANCIENT LITERATURE 13.3.1-3 §§62-72 70 13.3.1 §64 71 71 13.3.1 §§65-66 49, 69 13.3.4 §§74-79 78 13.4.5-9 §§103-20 262 13.9.1 §257-58 13.10.4 §§284-87 70 13.10.4 §287 100 13.11.3 §318 17 262 13.H.3 §319 13.13.2 §354 72, 96 13.254-58 59 59 13.275-81 14.7.2 §110 266, 270 114 14.7.2 §§114-18 70 14.8.1 §§127-32 113 14.10.1 §188 14.10.8 §§213-16 211 116 16.6.2 §§160-61 113 18.6.3 §159 131 18.6.3 §159-60 131 18.8.1 §§257-60 125 19.1.1 §1 131 19.5.1 §276 119 19.5.2 §278 120 19.5.2 §§280-85 116 19.5.2 §281 114 19.5.2 §283 262 20.2.3-4 §§34-48 20.5.2 §100 113, 131 113 20.7.3 §147 137 20.8.6 §§167-72 266-69 20.8.11 §195 Jewish War 1.1.1 §§31-33 1.31-33 1.62-65 2.8.7 §142 2.13.5 §§261-63 2.18.2 §§463 2.18.7-8 §§487-98 2.18.8 §§494-95 2.20.2 §560 2.487 6.9.2 §418 7.3.3 §44-45

96 69 59 218 137 270 138 138 270 4, 65 142 4

7.3.3 §45 185,264 7.10.1 §§409-19 139 7.10.2-3 §423-31 71 7.10.2-4 §§420-36 139 7.11.1-4 §§437-53 140 7.47 15 7.50-53 204 7.420-36 69 7.426 70 7.426-32 70 Vita 3.16 §3 16

269 266

Justus of Tiberias 60-61 Josephus, Vita 336-67 §65 61 Photius, Bibliotheca 31

60

12, Letter of Claudius 116, 119, 120, 121 Philo De Abrahamo 1-46 69-71 77 84

178 42 42 164

De Confusione Linguarum 38 190

20 20

De Decalogo 16 52-81 In Flaccum 6.23 17 25^2

29

127

Hypothetica lA 7.1-9 1.1

170 170 170

De losepho 131-37

136

Legatio ad Gaium 118, 128, 130, 132,133 13 134 120 127 139 127 143-47 134 144 145 144-49 126 157 126 126 159 125, 127 162 127 165 127 166-70 5 214 5 245 De Migratione 89-90 89-93 92 93 187-88

Abrahami 131 20 132 132 164

De Opificio Mundi

42 163,201 126, 126, 133, 134 263 127 138

1 §3 171 De Praemiis el Poenis 43-46 79-172 88 94 95 104 152

200 172

137 222 134 136 135 135 136 135, 136

324

INDEX OF ANCIENT LITERATURE 135 135 134

164 165 165-72 De

Providentia

Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica 7.14.64

137

Quaestiones et Solufiones in Genesin 218

4.8 Quis Rerum Heres

Divinaruin

De Vila Mosis 1.5 1.35 1.158 2.17 2.44 2.216 §168 2.232

222 137, 169 229 264 135. 161 184 5

Philo the Elder Clement, Siromateis 1.141

37

Josephus, Against Apion 1.218

23

37

56

Quod Deus Sit

Immutabilis

Philo the Epic Poet

54-57

\12-11

136

Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica

De Somniis

135 133 134

9.20.1 9.24.1 9.37.1 9.37.1-3

2.63-64 2.64 2.91-92 De

133, 134

Specialibus Legibus

1.13-29 1.66-97 2.62 2.62-63 §282 2.255

163, 201 202 264 184 163. 201

De Virtutibus 33 39 109-24 178 De Vita 3-9 5 78 80 85

54 54 57 54

215 222 179 215 Contemplativa 163, 201 211 212 246 211

Pseudo-Eupolemus 47-50 Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica 9.17 9.17.3 9.17.4 9,18.2

47 42 48 47

Pseudo-Hecataeus 52-54 Josephus, Against Apion 1.83-205 52 1.213-14 52

Clement, Stromateis 5.113.1-2

174

Pseudo-Orphic Frag merits 218, 219-24 Pseudo-Phocylides 3 9-21 30 31 39 42 54 69 75 98 102 103-4 104 107-8 115 140 163 177-78 183 185 186 190-91 191 192 194 198 210-17 228

16874 170 172 169 163 169 169 173 172 173 172 172 168 169 169, 172 169 169 169 172 170 170 170 170 170 173 173 173 170 172 173

Thatlus 51-52 Josephus, Antiquities 18.6.4 §167 51

On Abraham and (he Egyptians Josephus, Antiquities 1.7.2 §159

Pseudo-Menander Words of the Wise Menander

53

53

Suetonius, Augustus 67.2 Theodotus

51 57-60

INDEX OF ANCIENT LITERATURE Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica 9.22 A 60 9.22.1-11 57 9.22.5 59

Debarim 2.24

Theophilus Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica 9.34 53 9.34.19 47

Song of Songs viii, 9 §3

31.15

Rabbah

Zeno Papyri

17, 67, 75, 76

Lamentations i, 13 §41

Rabbah 146 Rabbah 146

RABBINIC SOURCES b. Berakhot Ala 43b 53b

233 233 233

b. Megillah 13a

231

b. Menahot I09a-b b. Sanhedrin 92b b. Shahbat 33b

72

256

224

Evangelica 32

250

b. Yebamot 76a

173

m. Menahot 13:10

72

m. Tamid

222 190

Epiphanius Adversus Haereses 64.29.6 Eusebius Praeparatio 9

18

Constitutions 213 212, 213 213 212 212

Clement Stromateis 5.14.123 5.113.1

255

Historia 4.2.1-4 4.2.3

Patrologia 25.562 25.563

Latina

Justin Martyr Oratio ad Graecos

4 4

217

Pseudo-Justin Martyr De Monarchia 2 220 Cohortio ad Gentiles 15 220

AnatoUs On the Passover Eusebius, Historia Ecclesiastica 7,32.16-18 Apostolic 7.36.1 7.36.1-6 7.36.6 7.39.2-4 8.6.5-8

142

265

CHRISTIAN SOURCES Josephus, Against Apion 1.216 53

325

Clement, Protrepticus Stromateis 220 5.123-24 220 Origen De Principiis 1.3.2 2.3.6

252 256

CLASSICAL SOURCES Aeschylus Eumenides 17-19 609-21

226 226

Antisthenes Cicero, De Natura Deorum 1.32

158

Ecclesiastica 141 143

Jerome Commentary on Daniel 3.11.14 69 11.13-14 4

Apollonius Molon Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica 9.19.1-3

7

Apollonius of Rhodes Argonautica 54

326


Appian 8.19.132 Bella 2.90

86

Eudoxus Cicero, De 87-99

Civilia 141

Cassius Dio Historia Romana 57.18.5a 67.14.1-3 68.32 Cicero On the Consular inces

263 269 141

Prov-

Cleanthes Hymn to Zeus

158

Diodorus Siculus Bibliotheca Historica 1.12.4 1.15.9-16.2 1.17.3 1.27.4 19.17.4-6 33-36 34-35 Euripides Hippolytus 252-54

41 41 41 41 65 100 10

Euhemerus of Messene Diodorus Siculus, Biblotheca Historica 5.41 163 6.1 163 Epictetus Discourses l.ll.l'A

Hecateus of Ahdera Diodorus Siculus, Bibliotheca Historica 1.96.4-9 41 40.3 5,9,155 40.3.4 10 40.8 5 Josephus, Against 1.186-89 1,190-91 1.201-4

159

Arrian, Dissertationes 2.9.19-21 269

Apion 65 156 157

Heraclitus Plutarch, De Pythiae Oraculis 6 {397A)

83

Herodotus 2.73 2.81

228 223

Hesiod Theogony

49

Works and Days 282-92 770 223

Horace Satires 1.4.138-43 1.5.100 Isocrates Ad Nicoclem 42-43 Juvenal Satires 6.594-97 14 14:96-106

213, 218

14:102-4 Divinatione 164

183 189

Livy History of Rome 31.14 39.8-19 Lycophron Alexandra

217 199

54, 201

Martial 12.57.13

24

Orosius 7.12

141

Pausanias 10.12

83

Phlegon Mirabilia 3.7

93

Plato Cratylus 400c

224

Laws 636 836 841-42

62 159 159 159

Phaedo 263

80d Symposium

172

160 267, 270 269

214 159, 214, 231

Timaeus 38e

56

Plutarch Isis and Osiris 24 [360B] 32 38

41 41 41

327

INDEX OF ANCIENT LITERATURE Lycurgus 15

159

Quaestiones Convivales 4.6 [671-72] 38, 68 39 8.9.1 Polybius 31.18.20 38.4.22

Seneca Augustine, De Dei 6.11

89 86

Civitate

12,264

Seostris Diodorus Siculus, 1.54-57 Bibliotheca Historica41 Herodotus 2.102-9

41

Strabo Geography 1.2 16 16.2 16.2.35-36 16.2.35-39 16.28

147 13 5 157 157 5

Suetonius Augustus 76 Domitian 12.2

Valerius 1,3,3

Maximus 262

268 Xenophon Memorabilia 142 2.1.21-34

Tiberius 36 36.1

269 263

Syncellus 347d 348d

141 141

Tacitus Annals 2,85.4 2.85.5 6.28 Historiae 5,13 5.3.1-4.2 5.5.1

269 263 224

Zeno Plutarch, De Alexandri Virtute 1.6 163 Republic Diogenes Laertius 7.33 159 Clement, Stromateis 5,11.76, 1-3

159

EGYPTIAN SOURCES 93 11 270

Varro Augustine, De Civitate Dei 4.31 159 Lactantius, Divinae Instilutiones 1.6

183

83

Book of the Dead

181

Manetho 9-11 Josephus, Against Apion 1.75-90 9 1.228 9 1,232-50 9 1.241 40 1.244 40 1.246 40 Potter's Oracle

90, 94

Between Athens and Jerusalem: Jewish Identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora (The Biblical Resource Series)

Religion in Hellenistic Athens

Athens and Jerusalem

Diaspora Nationalism and Jewish Identity in Habsburg Galicia

Studies on the Jewish Diaspora in the Hellenistic and Roman Periods

Jewish Civilization in the Hellenistic-Roman Period

Historical Fictions and Hellenistic Jewish Identity: Third Maccabees in Its Cultural Context (Hellenistic Culture and Society)

Between Alexandria And Jerusalem: The Dynamic of Jewish And Hellenistic Culture (The Brill Reference Library of Judaism)

The British World: Diaspora, Culture and Identity

The Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic Literature, 2nd Edition (The Biblical Resource Series)

City of Ruins: Mourning the Destruction of Jerusalem Through Jewish Apocalypse (Biblical Interpretation Series, 99)

City of Ruins: Mourning the Destruction of Jerusalem Through Jewish Apocalypse (Biblical Interpretation Series)

Identity, culture, and politics in the Basque diaspora

Reproducing Athens: Menander's Comedy, Democratic Culture, and the Hellenistic City

Studies in Ancient Yahwistic Poetry (Biblical Resource Series)

War, Food, and Politics in Early Hellenistic Athens

The Jewish Temple: A Non-Biblical Sourcebook

Jewish Wisdom in the Hellenistic Age (Old Testament Library)

Jerusalem in the Quran

The Three Blessings: Boundaries, Censorship, and Identity in Jewish Liturgy

Christian Identity in the Jewish and Graeco-Roman World

Did Moses Speak Attic?: Jewish Historiography and Scripture in the Hellenistic Period (JSOT Supplement Series)

Jerusalem in the Persian (and Early Hellenistic) Period and the Wall of Nehemiah

American Jewish Identity Politics

Encyclopedia of the Jewish Diaspora: Origins, Experiences, and Culture

New Jews: the end of the Jewish diaspora

The Exegetical Encounter between Jews and Christians in Late Antiquity (Jewish and Christian Perspectives Series)

Mezuzah on the Door (Jewish Identity)

The Muslim Diaspora: Gender, Culture and Identity (Routledge Islamic Studies)

The Christology of Early Jewish Christianity (Studies in Biblical theology)

The Creation of Man and Woman: Interpretations of the Biblical Narratives in Jewish and Christian Traditions (Themes in Biblical Narrative)

Between Athens and Jerusalem: Jewish Identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora (The Biblical Resource Series)

Religion in Hellenistic Athens

Athens and Jerusalem

Diaspora Nationalism and Jewish Identity in Habsburg Galicia

Studies on the Jewish Diaspora in the Hellenistic and Roman Periods

Jewish Civilization in the Hellenistic-Roman Period

Historical Fictions and Hellenistic Jewish Identity: Third Maccabees in Its Cultural Context (Hellenistic Culture and Society)

Between Alexandria And Jerusalem: The Dynamic of Jewish And Hellenistic Culture (The Brill Reference Library of Judaism)

The British World: Diaspora, Culture and Identity

The Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic Literature, 2nd Edition (The Biblical Resource Series)

City of Ruins: Mourning the Destruction of Jerusalem Through Jewish Apocalypse (Biblical Interpretation Series, 99)

City of Ruins: Mourning the Destruction of Jerusalem Through Jewish Apocalypse (Biblical Interpretation Series)

Identity, culture, and politics in the Basque diaspora

Reproducing Athens: Menander's Comedy, Democratic Culture, and the Hellenistic City

Studies in Ancient Yahwistic Poetry (Biblical Resource Series)

War, Food, and Politics in Early Hellenistic Athens

The Jewish Temple: A Non-Biblical Sourcebook

Jewish Wisdom in the Hellenistic Age (Old Testament Library)

Jerusalem in the Quran

The Three Blessings: Boundaries, Censorship, and Identity in Jewish Liturgy

Christian Identity in the Jewish and Graeco-Roman World

Did Moses Speak Attic?: Jewish Historiography and Scripture in the Hellenistic Period (JSOT Supplement Series)

Jerusalem in the Persian (and Early Hellenistic) Period and the Wall of Nehemiah

American Jewish Identity Politics

Encyclopedia of the Jewish Diaspora: Origins, Experiences, and Culture

New Jews: the end of the Jewish diaspora

The Exegetical Encounter between Jews and Christians in Late Antiquity (Jewish and Christian Perspectives Series)

Mezuzah on the Door (Jewish Identity)

The Muslim Diaspora: Gender, Culture and Identity (Routledge Islamic Studies)

The Christology of Early Jewish Christianity (Studies in Biblical theology)

The Creation of Man and Woman: Interpretations of the Biblical Narratives in Jewish and Christian Traditions (Themes in Biblical Narrative)

Recommend Documents