Seers, Sybils, and Sages in Hellenistic-Roman Judaism (Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism)

SEERS, SIBYLS AND SAGES IN HELLENISTIC-ROMAN JUDAISM

SEERS, SIBYLS A N D SAGES I N HELLENISTIC-ROMAN JUDAISM

J O H N J. C O L L I N S

' ' 6 8 ‫יי־ ל ־‬

BRILL ACADEMIC PUBLISHERS, INC. BOSTON · LEIDEN

2001

Library of C o n g r e s s Cataloging-in-Publication D a t a Collins, J o h n Joseph, 1946Seers, sibyls, and sages in Hellenistic-Roman Judaism/by John J. Collins, p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0 - 3 9 1 - 0 4 1 1 0 - X 1. Apocalyptic literature—History and criticism. 2. Bible. O.T. D a n i e l Criticism, interpretation, etc. 3. Oracula sibyllina. 4· Sibyls. 5. Dead Sea scrolls—Criticism, interpretation, etc. 6. Wisdom literature—Criticism, interpretation, etc. I. Title BS646.C657 2001 296.1—dc21 2001035446

ISBN 0-391-04110-X © All

rights

Copyright

reserved.

a retrieval

1997

No [tirt system,

mechanical,

by El.

in any

recording

permission Authorization

is granted

the appropriate Clearance

fees

Center, Danvers

form

the

items

are paid

be reproduced, without

internal

provided

directly

MA 01913, to

translated,

or

prior

/vrsomi!

that

to The

stored

mcuns, electronic,

publisher.

RosenχκκΙ

Fees are subject

Netherlands

or by any

for

by Brill

111

The

or otherwise,

from

to photocopy use

Leiden,

publication may

of this

or transmitted

photocopying,

Brill,

Copyright

Dritt, Suite 9 / 0 USA. change.

rRINTEP IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

written

in

CONTENTS

Foreword. Acknowledgements

vii ix

Introduction 1.

Before the Canon. Scriptures in Second Temple Judaism

3

I. Apocalypticism 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Genre, Ideology and Social Movements in Jewish Apocalypticism The Place of Apocalypticism in the Religion of Israel Jewish Apocalypticism against its Hellenistic Near Eastern Environment Apocalyptic Eschatology as the Transcendence of Death T h e Kingdom of God in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha The Christian Adaptation of the Apocalyptic Genre

25 39 59 75 99 115

II. Daniel 8.

Nebuchadnezzar and the Kingdom of God. Deferred Eschatology in the Jewish Diaspora 9. Stirring up the Great Sea: The Religio-Historical Background of Daniel 7 10. The Meaning of the End in the Book of Daniel 11. "The King has become a Jew:" The Perspective on the Gentile World in Bel and the Snake

131 139 157 167

III. Sibyls 12. The Jewish Adaptation of SibyUine Oracles 13. T h e Sibyl and the Potter: Political Propaganda in Ptolemaic Egypt 14. A Symbol of Otherness. Circumcision and Salvation in the First Century

181 199 211

IV. Dead Sea Scrolls 15. The Origin of the Qumran Community: A Review of the Evidence 16. Was the Dead Sea Sect an Apocalyptic Movement? 17. The Origin of Evil in Apocalyptic Literature and the Dead Sea Scrolls 18. Prophecy and Fulfillment in the Qumran Scrolls

239 261 287 301

V. Wisdom and apocalypticism 19. Cosmos and Salvation: Jewish Wisdom and Apocalypticism in the Hellenistic Age 20. The Sage in the Apocalyptic and Pseudepigraphic Literature 21. The Root of Immortality. Death in the Context of Jewish Wisdom 22. Wisdom, Apocalypticism and the Dead Sea Scrolls 23. Wisdom, Apocalypticism and Generic Compatibility

317 339 351 369 385

Indices Index of authors Index of passages Index of subjects

407 415 433

FOREWORD

During the talks which led to the decision to initiate the Supplements to the Journal for the Study ofJudaism, I was trying to draw the profile of the "ideal" book which readers of JSJ would immediately recognize as representative of their field. As models of such a book, I mentioned a monograph on the Book ofJubilees, and a collection of articles on Apocalypticism by John J. Collins. The reason for mentioning Jubilees is obvious, and equally obvious to me were the reasons for suggesting a collection of articles by Collins as a model for the books of the Series. Collins has done basic groundwork on complex theoretical issues such as the genre of Apocalypticism, but has also produced detailed case analyses of discrete units of texts; he has dealt with Jewish literature in Hebrew and Aramaic as well as with Jewish literature in Greek; his research spans practically the whole period covered by JSJ with an emphasis on the general Hellenistic an Roman Periods, and in it literary, socio-historical, religio-historical or theological themes are equally important. Writing a monograph in the Book of Jubilees is not an easy task, nor one which can be done at short notice. Preparing a collection of John J . Collins' essays for publication seemed feasible, and once he agreed to become the editor of the new Series I did not hesitate to put forth my request. He graciously agreed to prepare such a collection and selected the 23 articles which form the present book. These articles are thematically grouped in an Introduction, which discusses the problem of the Canon in Second Temple Judaism, and five parts. The first part contains seven articles dealing with Apocalypticism, and includes a previously unpublished study on "The Christian Adaptation of the Apocalyptic Genre"; the second part comprises four studies on the Book of Daniel; the third part offers three papers on the Sibylline Oracles, including a previously unpublished study on "The Jewish Adaptation of Sibylline Oracles"; the fourth part is formed by four studies on the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the fifth part analyzes in five articles the relationship between Wisdom and Apocalypticism. Each article demonstrates Collins' rigorous methodology and the breadth of his curiosity. He analyzes with the same interest the Jewish literature in Hebrew or in Aramaic as he does the literature

in Greek, he is equally attentive to the theoretical problems as to the sociological background of this literature, and considers with equal care the "normative" writings and the sectarian non-canonical works. For these reasons, this book is a model for the scholarly study of all aspects of Judaism, from the Persian period through Late Antiquity, including its influence on early Christianity, precisely the field of interest of the JSJSup Series. It goes without saying, that given the character of this volume, its publication in the JSJStip Series has been the exclusive decision of the assistant editor. Florentino Garcia Martinez

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The following articles have been published previously and are republished with permission: "Before the Canon. Scriptures in Second Temple Judaism," in Old Testament Interpretation. Past Present and Future. Essays in Honor of Gene M. Tucker, ed. J.L. Mays, D.L. Petersen and K.H. Richards (Nashville: Abingdon, 1995) 225-41, published by permission of Abingdon Press. "Genre, Ideology and Social Movements in Jewish Apocalypticism," Mysteries and Revelations. Apocalyptic Studies since the Uppsala Colloquium, ed. J.J. Collins a n d J . H . Charlesworth (JSPSup 9; Sheffield: J S O T , 1991) 11-32, published by permission of Sheffield Academic Press. "The Place of Apocalypticism in the Religion of Israel, Ancient Israelite Religion, Essays in Honor of F.M. Cross, ed. P.D. Miller, P.D. Hanson and S.D. McBride (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987) 539-58, published by permission of AugsburgFortress Publishers. 'Jewish Apocalyptic Against its Hellenistic Near Eastern Environment," BASOR 220(1975) 27-36, published by permission of the American School of Oriental Research. "Apocalyptic Eschatology as the Transcendence of Death, ‫ יי‬CBQ 36(1974) 21-43, published by permission of the Catholic Biblical Association. "The Kingdom of God in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha," The Kingdom of God in Twentieth Century Interpretation, ed. W. Willis (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1987) 81-95, published by permission of Hendrickson publishers. "Nebuchadnezzar and the Kingdom of God. Deferred Eschatology in the Jewish Diaspora," in Loyalitätskonflikte in der Religionsgeschichte. Festschrift für Carsten Colpe, ed. Christoph Elsas and Hans G. Kippenberg (Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann, 1990) 252-57, published by permission of Königshausen & Neumann Verlag. "Stirring up the Great Sea. The Religio-Historical Background of Daniel 7," The Book of Daniel in the Light of New Findings, ed. A.S. van der Woude; Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1993) 121-36, published by permission of Leuven University Press. "The Meaning of 'The End' in the Book of Daniel," Of Scnbes and Scrolls. Studies on the Hebrew Bible, Intertestamental Judaism and Christian

Origins, H.W. Attridge, J.J. Collins and T. Tobin, ed. (Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 1990) 91-98, published by permission of University Press of America. ' " T h e King has Become a J e w / The Perspective on the Gentile World in Bel and the Snake," Diaspora Jews and Judaism. Essays in Honor of, and in Dialogue with A. Thomas Kraabel (South Florida Studies in the History of Judaism 41; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992) 335-46, published by permission of Scholars Press. "The Sibyl and the Potter: Political Propaganda in Ptolemaic Egypt," Religious Propaganda and Missionary Competition in the New Testament World, ed. Lukas Bormann, Kelly Del Tredici and Angela Standhartinger (Leiden: Brill, 1994) 57-69, published by permission of Ε.J. Brill Publishers. "A Symbol of Otherness: Circumcision and Salvation in the First Century," "To See Ourselves as Others See Us." Christians, Jews, "Others" in Late Antiquity, ed. Jacob Neusner and Ernest S. Frerichs (Chico: Scholars Press, 1985)163-186, published by permission of Scholars Press. "The Origin of the Qumran Community: A Review of the Evidence," To Touch the Text. Biblical and Related Studies in Honor of Joseph A. Fitzmyer, S.J., ed. Paul J. Kobelski and Maurya P. Horgan (New York: Crossroad, 1989) 159-78, published by permission of Crossroad Publishing Co. "Was the Dead Sea Sect an Apocalyptic Movement?" Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls, ed. L.H. Schiffman (Sheffield: J S O T , 1990) 25-51, published by permission of Sheffield Academic Press. "The Origin of Evil in Apocalyptic Literature and the Dead Sea Scrolls,'5 Congress Volume, Paris 1992, ed. J.A. Emerton (Leiden: Brill, 1995) 25-38, published by permission of E.J. Brill Publishers. "Prophecy and Fulfillment in the Q.umran Scrolls," JETS 30(1987) 267-78, published by permission of the Evangelical Theological Society. "Cosmos and Salvation: Jewish Wisdom and Apocalyptic in the Hellenistic Age," History of Religions 17 (1977) 121-142, published by permission of the University of Chicago. "The Sage in the Apocalyptic and Pseudepigraphic Literature," The Sage in Israel and the Ancient Near East, ed. John G. Gammie and Leo Perdue (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990) 343-54, published by permission ofJames E. Eisenbrauns. "The Root of Immortality. Death in the Context of Jewish Wisdorn," HTR 71(1978)177-92, published by permission of Harvard Theological Review. "Wisdom, Apocalypticism and the Dead Sea Scrolls," 'Jedes Ding hat

seine Zeit..." Studien zur israelitischen und aUoHentalischen Weishat Diethelm Michel zum 65. Geburtstag, ed. A.A. Diesel et al. (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1996), published by permission of Walter de Gruyter Publishers. "Wisdom, Apocalypticism, and Generic Compatibility" In Search of Wisdom. Essays in Memory of John G. Gammie, ed. L. Perdue, B.B. Scott and W J . Wiseman (Louisville: Westminster, 1993) 165-85, published by permission of Westminster/John Knox Press. Chapter 7, "The Christian Adaptation of the Apocalyptic Genre," a paper delivered at the International Symposium on the Book of Revelation, Athens, September 1995. Chapter 12, "The Jewish Adaptation of Sibylline Oracles." Paper presented at a conference on Sibyls and Sibylline Oracles in Macerata, Italy, in September 1994. These essays have been edited to standardize the style. Some errors have been corrected and some references have been updated, but there has been no systematic revision. The opening essay, "Before the Canon," has been expanded to include more complete documentation than was included in the previously published essay.

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER O N E

BEFORE T H E CANON. SCRIPTURES IN S E C O N D TEMPLE JUDAISM

It is the nature of scholarship that the firm conclusions of one generation are reexamined and overturned by the next. The recent debate about the canonization of Hebrew Scripture is a case in point. The traditional Jewish view, which ascribes the fixing of the canon and its division into three sections to Ezra and the "Men of the Great Assembly," 1 has been discredited for some time. In the late 19th century, however, a new orthodoxy arose.2 On this view, the Torah was canonized in the time of Ezra, the Prophets were complete by the time of Ben Sira at the beginning of the second century BCE and the Writings were closed at the Council of Jamnia, about 90 CE.3 T h e larger canon of the Christian Church was believed to have originated as the canon of Alexandrian, and more broadly Diaspora, Judaism. 4 But this consensus too has eroded in the last third of the twentieth century. A.C. Sundberg conclusively demonstrated that "there was no 'Alexandrian canon' of Hellenistic Judaism that was distinct from and different in content from a 'Palestinian canon.'" Rather, he argued, "in addition to closed collections of Law and Prophets, a wide religious literature without definite bounds circulated throughout Judaism as holy scripture before Jamnia." 5 More recendy, Jamnia itself has come under

1 This view is attributed to Elias Levita, in his book ‫ מ ס ו ר ח ה מ ס ו ר ת‬in the first half of the sixteenth century. Levita was building on the work of David Kimhi (1160-1235). The Talmudic tractate Baba Bathra 14b-15a credits the Men of the Great Assembly with writing the books of Ezekiel, the Twelve Minor Prophets, Daniel and the Scroll of Esther. 2 H.E. Ryle, The Canon of the Old Testament (London: MacMillan, 1892); F. Buhl, Canon and Text of the Old Testament (Edinburgh: Clark, 1892) 24; G.F. Moore, Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era (New York: Schocken, 1971) 1.86; S.R. Driver, An Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament (New York: Meridian, 1957) i-xi; O. Eissfeldt, The Old Testament. An Introduction (New York: Harper & Row, 1965) 564-68. 3 On the origin of this idea see D.E. Aune, "On the Origins of the , Council of Yavneh' Myth," JBL 110(1991) 491-93, who traces the idea of "a council of Pharisees" to Spinoza, and the location at Yavneh to Heinrich Graetz. 4 The history of the "Alexandrian Canon" hypothesis has been chronicled by A.C. Sundberg, The Old Testament of the Early Church (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1964). 5 Sundberg, The Old Testament, 102-03.

scrutiny and the hypothesis of a Council of Jamnia has been very widely rejected. 6 The Council of Jamnia The discussion of the "Council of Jamnia," however, involves a number of distinct issues, which should be treated with discrimination. The evidence is as follows. Before the fall of Jerusalem in 70 CE, R. Johanan ben Zakkai established an academy at Jamnia (Yavneh) which proceeded to function like a Sanhédrin in the period between the Jewish revolts (70-132 CE). Johanan was succeeded by R. Gamaliel II. Somewhere between 80 and 117 CE Gamaliel was deposed for a time, and Eleazar ben Azariah was installed as head of the academy. The Mishnah reports that on the day of the installation of Eleazar, the sages ruled that both Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes "make the hands unclean," that is, are holy books. The same passage states that "all the Holy Scriptures render the hands unclean," and so it is clear that the point at issue was whether Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes ranked among the Holy Scriptures. This passage is followed by a series of enactments introduced by the phrase "on that day" (m. Tadaim 3:5-4:4). Later tradition (b. Berakot 28a) claimed that every ruling introduced by the phrase "on that day" was made on that occasion. 7 Consequently, the impression arose that there was a single session which made definitive decisions in the manner of the later Church Councils. This impression is misleading. The deliberations at Jamnia were closer to the character of a school, academy, or court. 8 The celebrated discussion of Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs, in Mishnah Tadaim 3:5, only records that there was some dispute about the status of these books, and in fact such disputes were not terminated by the decisions at Jamnia. Some later rabbis, notably R. Meir (135-170) denied that Eccle6

J.P. Lewis, "What Do We Mean by Jabnch?" Journal of Bible and Religion 32(1964) 125-32 (reprinted in S.Z. Leiman, ed.. The Canon and Masorah of the Hebrew Bible. An Introductory Reader [New York: Ktav, 1974] 254-61); S. Z. Leiman, The Canonization of Hebrew Scripture (Hamden, CT: Archon, 1975) 120-24; P. Schäfer, "Die sogenannte Synode von Jabne," Judaica 31(1975) 54-64; 116-24; G. Stcmbergcr, "Die sogenannte 'Synode von Jabnc' und das frühe Christentum," Kairos 19(1977) 14-21; R. Bcckwith, The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church and Its Background in Early Judaism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985) 276-77; J. Barton, Oracles of God: Perceptions of Ancient Prophecy in Israel after the Exile (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986) 24. 7 J.P. Lewis, "Jamnia (Jabnch), Council of," Anchor Bible Dictionary 3. 634-7. This claim has been shown to be untenable. See Leiman, The Canonization of Hebreiv Scriptures, 122. " Lewis, , Jamnia," 636.

siastes defiled the hands. 9 There is no evidence that the status of other Writings was debated, or that a final decision regarding the canon was reached at Jamnia. The notion of a Council ofJamnia, on the analogy of the Church Councils, is properly discredited. The Jamnia hypothesis, however, admits of a looser formulation. Sundberg, who defended the hypothesis, used the "Council" as "a loose term designating the decisions of the Pharisaic schools that gathered at Jamnia and gained ascendancy in Judaism following the fall of Jerusalem." 10 He also recognized "that the actions of the schools of Jamnia were not official decisions. Probably there was no body in Judaism that functioned in an 'official5 capacity after the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70."" While the term "Council" is unsatisfactory, the deliberations at Jamnia in the period between the revolts had an important bearing on the emergence of the biblical canon. The word "canon" is admittedly anachronistic in this context. It is first applied to a definite list of scriptural books in fourth century Christianity, 12 and carries the connotation "rule of faith" as well as "fixed number. ‫ יי‬The kind of authority ascribed to these books in a Jewish context was somewhat different. Nonetheless, for the sake of convenience we may follow standard usage and use the term "canon" to mean that a specific number of books is recognized as qualitatively different from other literature and endowed with a normative status for a religious community. In the case of Scripture, the authority of the literature derives from divine inspiration. 13 A fixed number of books The delimitation of a fixed number of biblical books is in fact first attested at the end of the first century, when the academy at Jamnia was in session.14 In his tract Against Apian, written in the last decade of 9

Leiman, The Canonization of Hebrew Scripture, 123. Sundberg, The Old Testament, 113. 11 Ibid., 127. 12 The earliest usage in this sense is usually attributed to Athanasius, in his Defence of the Nicene ΰφηίύοη 18.1-2 (c. 350 CE) and his Festal Letter (367 CE). Cf. also the Council of Laodicea, canon 59 (c. 360 CE). See W. Beyer, "κανών," TO/VT 3(1965) 601; L M . McDonald, The Formation of the Christian Biblical Canon (Nashville: Abingdon, 1988) 43. A posssible earlier occurrence is found in Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 6.25.3-5, but there the word may mean "norm" rather than list of Scriptures. 13 Leiman, The Canonization of Hebrew Scripture, 14-15, distinguishes between canonical literature, such as the Mishnah or Talmud, and the inspired canonical literature of the Bible. 14 The argument of Beckwith (The Old Testament Canon, 238, following R.H. Charles) that a reference to twenty two books has been lost from the Book ofJubilees 10

the first century CE, the Jewish historian Josephus sets out to refute the detractors of his people. The first point at issue is the antiquity of the Jews and the reliability of their records. After some disparaging remarks about the trustworthiness of the Greeks as antiquarians, he emphasizes the care with which Jewish records are preserved. "With us," he says, "it is not open to everybody to write the records." This privilege was reserved for prophets, guided by divine inspiration. Consequently "there is no discrepancy in what is written." He goes on: we d o not possess myriads of inconsistent books, conflicting with each other. O u r books, those which are justly accredited, are b u t two a n d twenty, a n d contain the record of all time. O f these, five are the books of Moses, comprising the laws and the traditional history f r o m the birth of m a n d o w n to the d e a t h of the lawgiver. T h i s period falls only a little short of three t h o u s a n d years. F r o m the d e a t h of Moses until Artaxerxes, w h o succeeded X e r x e s as king of Persia, the prophets subsequent to Moses wrote the history of the events of their own times in thirteen books. T h e r e m a i n i n g four books contain h y m n s to G o d a n d precepts for the c o n d u c t of h u m a n life. F r o m Artaxerxes to o u r o w n time the complete history has been written, but has not b e e n d e e m e d w o r t h y of equal credit with the earlier records, because of the failure of the exact succession of the p r o p h e t s (Against Apion 1.37-41).

This passage in Josephus is most probably the earliest witness to the notion that only a specific number of books were "justly accredited" among the Jews. A similar idea is found in the apocalypse of 4 Ezra, which is roughly contemporary with the tract Against Apion. This apocalypse envisages a situation where "thy law has been burned and so no one knows the things that have been done or will be done by thee" (4 Ezra 14:21). Ezra is given a fiery liquid to drink, which causes his heart, and mouth, to pour forth understanding. Five scribes write down what he says, so that over a period of forty days ninety four books are written. Then Ezra is told: M a k e public the twenty-four books that you wrote first a n d let the w o r t h y a n d the u n w o r t h y read them; b u t keep the seventy that were written last, in o r d e r to give t h e m to the wise a m o n g your people. For in t h e m is the spring of understanding, the fountain of wisdom, a n d the river of knowledge (4 Ezra 14:45-47).

While 4 Ezra differs sharply from Josephus in the claim that the hidden books contain the higher wisdom, it shares the notion of a special category of books, limited to a specific number. It is generally assumed that Josephus > 22 books are the same as 4 Ezra's 24, though counted differently. Some later authorities, such as Origen and (second century BCE) at 2:23 must be rejected. Sec J.C. VanderKam, The Book of Jubilees (Louvain: Peeters, 1989) 2.13-14.

Jerome, count Judges-Ruth and Jeremiah-Lamentations each as one book, for a total of 22, while 24 is the standard number in Talmudic sources.15 We know from Antiquities book 11 that Josephus included the book of Esther, which has not been found in the Dead Sea Scrolls, and is also missing from the lists of Melito of Sardis in the second century and of Athanasius in the fourth. On the other hand, we cannot assume that Josephus' canon was identical with our Hebrew Bible, since he narrates the contest between Darius' guards, which is only found in the apocryphal book of 1 Esdras (1 Esdr 3; cf. Ant. 11.33). This may be an issue of text rather than of canon; 1 Esdras may not have been regarded as a different book from EzraNehemiah. While some uncertainty remains, however, 4 Ezra and Josephus, taken together, constitute strong evidence that a "canon," in the sense of a fixed number of authoritative books, had been established, at least in some circles, by the end of the first century. The antiquity of the canon What was the origin of this "canon"? The theory that it was promulgated by the sages at Jamnia has been shown to lack supporting evidence, but the same can be said of any other theory. Several recent works have argued that the Hebrew canon was closed before the turn of the era. Sid Leiman suggested that the activity of Judas Maccabee, as described in 2 Macc 2:14-15 "may, in fact, be a description of the closing of the Hagiographa, and with it, the entire biblical canon." 16 The passage in question reads: "In the same way Judah also collected all the books that had been lost on account of the war which had come upon us, and they are in our possession. So if you have need of them, send people to get them for you." Beckwith goes further and asks: w h a t is m o r e likely t h a n that, in gathering together the Scriptures, h e a n d his c o m p a n i o n s the Hasidim classified complete collection in the w a y which f r o m that time traditional, dividing the miscellaneous non-Mosaic writings Prophets a n d the o t h e r Books? 17

scattered the now became into the

But 2 Maccabees says nothing whatever about canonization. It only says that Judas collected "all the books that had been lost on account of the war." There is no suggestion that he distinguished between books that were canonical and others that were not, much less that he introduced distinctions within a canonical corpus. In fact, all the 15

See Leiman, The Canonization of Hebrew Scripture, 32. Ibid, 29. 17 Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon, 152. 16

available evidence suggests that the category of Scriptures, or authoritative writings, was open-ended throughout the Second Temple period. This is not to say that there was no recognition of authoritative Scriptures. The formation of the Hebrew canon was a lengthy process, which can be traced back to the promulgation of "the book of the law" in the reform ofjosiah (621 BCE).18 Ezra is often credited with giving the Torah, or Pentateuch, its final shape.19 The books of Ezra and Nehemiah, however, make no mention of the Day of Atonement, although Nehemiah 8 describes the liturgical observances of the seventh month, especially the Feast of Booths. The omission indicates that the Pentateuch had not yet reached its final form, although Ezra presupposes other priestly laws, and must have had something close to the Torah as we know it.20 The prophetic corpus took shape somewhere in the Persian or early Hellenistic period. The first clear witness to a canon, in the sense of an accepted corpus of authoritative scripture, is found in the prologue to Ben Sira. The prologue was written by Sirach's grandson, who had migrated to Egypt in 132 BCE, in the thirty eighth year of Euergetes II. The prologue was written some time later, possibly after the death of that king in 117 BCE.21 It begins with the following statement: Many great teachings have been given to us through the Law and the Prophets and the others that followed them, and for these we should praise Israel for instruction and wisdom...So my grandfather Jesus, who had devoted himself especially to the reading of the Law and Prophets and the other books of our ancestors, and had acquired considerable proficiency in them, was himself also led to write something pertaining to instruction and wisdom.

It has been widely assumed that this statement implies a tri-partite canon, 22 but in fact it is not at all clear that "the other books of our ‫ "י‬Leiman, The Canonization of Hebrew Scripture, 16. Leiman goes on to adduce evidence for pre-Deuteronomic "written and canonical law corpora" (p. 19), but "canonical" here means little more than "authoritative." 19 E.g. G.W. Anderson, "Canonical and Non-Canonical," in P. Ackroyd and C.F. Evans, ed., The Cambridge History of the Bible I. From the Beginnings to Jerome (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970) 122-23. 20 J. Blenkinsopp, Ezra-Nehemiah. A Commentary (OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1988) 157, 291. 21 P.W. Skchan and A.A. DiLella, The Wisdom of Ben Sira (AB 39; Garden City: Doubleday, 1987) 134, following Rudolf Smcnd, Die Weisheit des Jesus Sirach erklärt (Berlin: Reimer, 1906) 3-4, who argues that the aorist participle, συγχρονίσας, "having been a contemporary," implies that the passage was written after the king's reign had come to an end. 22 So Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon, 111; E E . Ellis, The Old Testament in Early Christianity (WUNT 54; Tübingen: Mohr, 1991), 9.

ancestors" constitute a canonical category. They are simply "other traditional writings." 23 The category is open-ended and, according to the grandson, Sirach himself felt free to contribute to it. The Jewish writings to which Sirach alludes are quite limited. He wrote at some time in the first quarter of the second century BCE, before the composition of most of the books we know as Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha and of the Book of Daniel. He also shows no awareness of some older writings that were eventually accepted as biblical, such as Ruth, Song of Songs, Esther or, most surprisingly, Ezra (although he praises Nehemiah in Sir 49:13).24 Even writings on which he draws freely, such as Proverbs, are not necessarily distinguished as qualitatively different from other religious writings. They are traditional, but not necessarily canonical in the later sense of the term. There is no doubt that the book of the Torah is of fundamental importance to him, (witness his bold identification of the Book of the Law with Wisdom in 24:23) and that he draws heavily on traditional Jewish literature. 25 There is also, however, evidence of dependence on non-Jewish wisdom texts: there are numerous points of contact with the Greek gnomic poet Theognis, 26 and with the Demotic wisdom book of Phibis, preserved in Papyrus Insinger.27 The ideal sage not only devotes himself to the study of the law of the Most High, but seeks out the wisdom of all the ancients (Sir 39:1). There is in Sirach what we might call a "canon consciousness" with respect to the Torah, but there is no sense of a closed canon beyond the books of Moses. It is commonly inferred that the collection of Prophets was closed by Sirach's time, and that the inference is confirmed by the fact that Daniel was not included in the Prophets in the Hebrew Bible. This inference, too, is unsafe. T o be sure, Sirach knew all the prophets of the Hebrew Bible, and refers to the Twelve as such. In his review of Israelite history in the "Praise of the Fathers," however, it is not apparent, that he makes any distinction between the prophetic books and Nehemiah. In the New Testament period, David was often regarded as a prophet and the Psalms as prophecy (e.g. Acts 2:30). In short we cannot tell just how much material was categorized 23

See the remarks of Barton, Oracles of God, 47. Skehan and DiLella, The Wisdom of Ben Sira, 41; Leiman, The Canonization of Hebrew Scripture, 29. 25 See E.J. Schnabel, Law and Wisdom fiom Ben Sira to Paul (Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 1985) 69-73, 26 T. Middendorp, Die Stellung Jesu Ben Siros zwischen Judentum und Hellenismus (Leiden: Brill, 1973) 15-22; J . T . Sanders, Ben Sira and Demotic Wisdom (Chico: Scholars Press, 1983) 29-38. 27 Sanders, Ben Sira and Demotic Wisdom, 61-106. 24

under "The Prophets" in Ben Sira's time.28 Daniel, too, is often identified as a prophet in antiquity. 4QF10ri1egium (4ÇH 74) 2:4 speaks of "the book of Daniel the Prophet," Matt 24:15 refers to "the prophet Daniel, ‫ יי‬and Josephus regards him as "one of the greatest prophets" {Ant 10.11.7 §266-68). While Daniel is not included in the prophets in the Masoretic Bible, it is quite possible that the book was classified as prophetic in antiquity, or that the line between prophets and writings was not clearly drawn. 29 Most of our witnesses through the New Testament period attest a bi-partite rather than a tri-partite division of the scriptures: so Matt 5:17; 7:12; 11:13; 16:16; 22:40; Luke 16:29-31; Acts 13:15; 24:14; 28:23; Rom 3:21. The normal reference is to "The Law and the Prophets. 30 ' ‫ י‬Luke 24:44 is exceptional in the N T in referring to "the law of Moses, the prophets and the psalms." A similar view of Scripture is implied in Philo's account of the Therapeutae {De vita contemplativa §25) he says that in each house they had a consecrated room into which they took nothing but "laws and oracles delivered through the mouth of the prophets, and psalms and anything else which fosters and perfects knowledge and piety." This passage is often cited as evidence for a tri-partite canon, 31 but the last category "anything else" is clearly open-ended. As in Luke, there is recognition that the Psalms belong among the holy scriptures, but there is nothing to indicate how either the Therapeutae or Philo delimited the books of the prophets. Philo's own usage of scripture is predominantly focused on the Torah, which he cites forty times as often as the books of the Prophets and Hagiographa combined. 32 Here again there is recognition that the Torah is in a class by itself, but that prophetic and other books are also of value, without any clear demarcation of the latter categories. The boundary between the Prophets and the other Writings remains a problem in the passage from Josephus quoted above. Josephus assigns 13 books to the prophetic corpus, and only four to the Writings. The latter four are most plausibly identified as Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and Song of Songs. On this reckoning, EzraNehemiah, Chronicles, Esther and Job must be assigned to the

29

Barton, Oracles of God, 48. See Klaus Koch, "Is Daniel also among the Prophets?" Int 39(1985) 117-30; Barton, Oracles of God, 35-37 30 Barton, Oracles of God, 35. 31 E.g. Leiman, The Canonization of Hebrew Scripture, 31; Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon, 117; Ellis, The Old Testament, 8-9. 32 Leiman, The Canonization of Hebrew Scripture, 31. 29

Prophets. 33 Such an alignment corresponds neither to the Hebrew nor to Greek Bibles as they emerged in later tradition. Diverse Scriptures The evidence, then, for the period before 70 CE points to a core canon, consisting of the Torah and Prophets, which was universally accepted, although the precise definition of the prophetic corpus seems to have varied, and an open-ended supplement of "other writings" was also acknowledged. It is quite possible that some group or groups delimited the "other writings" exacdy as Josephus and 4 Ezra did. Already in the nineteenth century Frants Buhl argued that we cannot possibly assume that the representation which Josephus, residing in Rome shordy after the Synod of Jamnia, gives of the contents and idea of the canon must have been influenced by the decisions of the Synod.

Instead, "it is highly probable that Josephus in his Apology reported simply the teaching of the Pharisees of his times."34 More recendy Frank Cross has also argued that Josephus was drawing on Pharisaic tradition, and has further suggested that both text and canon were fixed under the auspices of Hillel, in the early first century CE. He cites a saying from the Talmud (Sukkah 20a) that When Israel forgot the Torah, Ezra came up from Babylon and reestablished it; and when Israel once again forgot the Torah, Hillel the Babylonian came up and reestablished it,

but the point of this saying is usually taken, quite satisfactorily, to refer to the interpretation of the Torah, rather than to the canon. 35 A more weighty consideration can be found in the account of the dispute about Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs in the Mishnah: "Ecclesiastes is among the lenient decisions of the School of Shammai and among the stringent decisions of the School of Hillel" (m. Tadaim 3:5; cf. Megillah 7a). The ruling at Jamnia affirmed the teaching of the house of Hillel. This would seem to suggest that the status of particular books had been discussed in the disputes between the houses of Hillel and Shammai before 70 CE, and that the sages at Jamnia only needed to address a few outstanding disputes. 33

So Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon, 80, Buhl, Canon and Text, 25. 35 F.M. Cross, "The Text Behind the Text of the Hebrew Bible," Bible Review 1(1985) 13-25. 34

Hillel, however, did not speak for all Judaism. There is good evidence that other strands of Judaism had a wider body of Scriptures than did the Pharisees. One corpus of evidence in this regard is constituted by the Greek Bible inherited by early Christianity. There is considerable variation in the manuscripts and in the lists cited by the Church Fathers, and so it is inappropriate to speak of an Alexandrian canon. The most frequent additional books are those that came to be designated Apocrypha after the Reformation: Tobit, Judith, Sirach, Wisdom of Solomon, 1-2 Maccabees, Baruch, Letter of Jeremiah, 1-2 Esdras, Prayer of Manasseh and the additions to Esther and Daniel. Others that are sometimes included are 3-4 Maccabees, Psalm 151 and the Psalms of Solomon. While 2 Esdras and possibly 4 Maccabees were composed after 70 CE, the others had presumably won status in Jewish circles before they were adopted by Christians. It is difficult to see why books such as Judith or 1 Maccabees should have been accepted as Scripture by Christians if they were not so recognized in some Jewish circles. Presumably these were the books that enjoyed Scriptural status in the Diaspora, even if they were never formalized as a canon. New light has now been shed on the Scriptures of the land of Israel by the publication of the Dead Sea Scrolls.36 The evidence of the Scrolls for the canon has often been discounted on the grounds that they only represent a sectarian view. There is indeed compelling evidence that the collection as a whole has a sectarian character. 37 It has a predilection for sectarian rule-books (12 copies of the Community Rule, 7 of the Damascus Document) and books of a Hasmonean or Pharisaic stamp (the books of Maccabees, Judith, Psalms of Solomon) are conspicuously absent. Nonetheless, as the extent of the collection becomes clear, it is apparent that not all the writings were distinctively sectarian. 3 " It has been estimated that about a thousand documents were hidden in the caves. Fragments of some 900 survive, although only about 660 are sufficiently well preserved to permit a characterization of their content. 39 While this corpus is 36 Ε. Τον, with Stephen Pfann, The Dead Sea Scroll·, on Microfiche (Leiden: Brill, 1993); F. Garcia Martinez, The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated (Leiden:' Brill, 1994). 3 ' For the debate on the provenance of the Scrolls see N. Golb, "Who Hid the Dead Sea Scrolls?" BA 48(1985) 68-82; F. Garcia Martinez, "A 'Groningen' Hypothesis of Qumran Origins and Early History," RevQ 14(1990) 521-41; J.C. VanderKam, The Dead Sea Scrolls Today (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994) 71-98. M On the problem of distinguishing sectarian literature, see C.A. Newsom, " 'Sectually Explicit' Literature from Qumran," in W.H. Propp, B. Halpern and D.N. Freedman, ed., The Hebrew Bible and its Interpreters (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1990) 167-87. Η. Stegemann, Die Essener, Qumran, Johannes der Täufer

not a random sampling of the literature of the time, much of it was surely known beyond the confines of the sect that preserved it. The evidence of the Scrolls The most explicit comment on the authoritative writings of the day is found in the so-called Halakhic Letter, 4 Q M M T . This document is addressed to a religious leader of Israel, most probably a High Priest, and it sets out the reasons why the community had separated itself from the majority of the people. It appeals to the leader to consider the validity of the sectarian interpretation of Scripture: "For on account of [these things] we have [written] for you that you may perceive in the book of Moses [and in the words of the projphets and in Davi[d ] from generation to generation. ‫ יי‬The statement refers to the familiar categories of the Law and the Prophets. David was widely regarded as a prophet, but he is singled out as the author of a special category (Psalms). These were the Scriptures that were presumed to be common to all Jews. 40 The canon that the sectarians shared with the authorities was basically a bi-partite canon, with the addition of Psalms. The fundamental importance of the revealed Torah at Qumran is beyond doubt. According to the "Well midrash" on Num 21:18 in the Damascus Document, "the Well is the Law, and those who dug it were the converts of Israel who went out of the land of Israel to sojourn in the land of Damascus...The Stave is the Interpreter of the Law..." 41 Similarly, the Community Rule instructs the sectarians to prepare in the wilderness the way of the Lord, and specifies that "this is the study of the Law which He commanded by the hand of Moses." 42 In 1 QS 8, the fundamental revelation of the Law is supplemented by "all that has been revealed from age to age" and by what "the Prophets have revealed by His Holy Spirit." The authoritative status of the Prophets, and the Psalms, is confirmed by the fact that they are subject to a special form of interpretation, in und Jesus (Fribourg: Herder, 1993) 116-93 regards only a small portion of the library as distinctively sectarian. 39 Stegemann, Die Essener, 113. 40 Suggestions that a reference to Chronicles, and so to the rest of the Writings, (Ellis, The Old Testament, 10) should be restored in the lacuna seem improbable. Chronicles is barely attested at Qumran, and there is no evidence that it enjoyed any special authority. 41 CD 6:2-11 (trans. G. Vermes, The Dead Sea Saolls in English [4th ed.; Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1995]) 101. The translation of the phrase ‫( טכי ישראל‬here: "converts of Israel") is disputed. Alternative renderings are "returnees of Israel" or "captivity of Israel." 42 1QS 8:14-15.

the pesharim, which apply the words of the prophets to the experiences of the community at the end of days. The pesher mode of interpretation could be applied to prophetic passages in the Torah as well as to the prophetic books as can be seen from the pesher on Genesis 49 in 4Q252. There is also a pesher on Psalms, and Daniel is interpreted in pesher-like manner in the Florilegium and in the Melchizedek scroll, but none of the other Writings is interpreted in this way. This suggests that Psalms and Daniel were regarded as prophetic books, even if Psalms was understood to constitute a special category in 4 Q M M T . This view of the emerging canon corresponds with what we know from other sources for the period between the Maccabees and the fall ofJerusalem in 70 CE. The common view of authoritative Scriptures, however, is modified in a number of ways by the Scrolls. First there is the existence of variant texts. Examples include a text of Exodus that corresponds to the Samaritan recension, except that it lacks the distinctively Samaritan mention o f M t . Gerizim at Exod 20:1743 and a text of Jeremiah that agrees with the short recension found in the Septuagint. 44 The most controversial example is provided by the Psalms Scroll from Cave 11.45 This scroll contains most of the last third of the Psalter but in an unconventional arrangement. It also includes a poem identical with 2 Sam 23:1-7 ("the last words of David") and several apocryphal psalms: Psalm 151 (a variant of the corresponding Psalm in the Greek psalter), Pss. 154-55, which are also extant in Syriac, and a poem related to Sir 51:13-19, 30. There are also three psalms which were previously unknown: "A Plea for Deliverance," "Apostrophe to Zion," and a "Hymn to the Creator." There is also a prose catalogue of David's compositions, placed neither at the beginning nor at the end (it is followed by Pss. 140:15, 134:1-3 and Psalm 151). The editor of this scroll, James Sanders, regarded it as a portion of the Davidic Psalter.46 The inclusion of "the last words of David" 43

P.W. Skehan, "Qumran and the Present State of Old Testament Text Studies: The Masoretic Text," JBL 78(1959) 21-25. See the study of the scroll by Judith E. Sanderson, An Exodus Scrollfrom Qumran: 4QpaleoExodm and the Samaritan Tradition (HSS 30; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1986) and the official publication in P.W. Skehan, E. Ulrich and J.E. Sanderson, Qumran Cave 4. IV. Palaeo-Hebrew and Greek Biblical Manuscripts (DJD 9; Oxford: Clarendon, 1992) 53-130. 44 Ε. Τον, "The Literary History of the Book of Jeremiah in the Light of its Textual History," inJ.H. Tigay, ed., Empirical Models for Biblical History (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1985) 213-37. 45 J.A. Sanders, The Psalms Scroll of Qumran Cave 11 (llQPs*) (DJD 4; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1965). 46 Sanders has often defended this view. See e.g. "The Psalms Scroll from Qumran [1 lQPs a ] Reviewed," in On Language, Culture and Religion. In Honor of ΕΛ. Nida

and the prose catalogue suggest that the entire collection was regarded as Davidic. There is no distinction in the scroll between canonical and non-canonical material. Sanders infers that the content and order of the Psalter had not yet been finalized in this period. This conclusion was vigorously disputed by such scholars as M. Goshen-Gottstein, 47 S. Talmon 4 8 and P. Skehan, 49 who suggested that it was merely a collection for liturgical use, without implications for the canon. It is difficult to see, however, why a catalogue of David's works should be included in a liturgical collection. It is probably true that the scroll was not viewed as definitive or canonical; the question is whether any collection of Psalms was so viewed in this period. Whatever use was made of the Psalms scroll, no distinction was made between canonical and apocryphal compositions. Sanders has had the better of the argument: the Psalter was still fluid at Qumran. 5 0 It should be noted that the Psalms Scroll shows no signs of distinctively sectarian interests. Since some of the additional material is also found in other manuscript traditions (Pss 151, 154-5) we must conclude that variation in the Psalter was not peculiar to Qumran. Another more perplexing kind of variation is presented by the Temple Scroll. This document weaves together related but different legal texts, mainly from Deuteronomy and Leviticus, often with new interpretations. 51 It is presented as a first person address of God to Moses, so that it becomes in effect a new Torah. The status of this document vis-a-vis the traditional Torah remains one of the puzzles of the Dead Sea Scrolls. In view of the first person divine speech, one assumes that if the document was accepted at all it was accepted as divine revelation. T h e divine name is written in square script, as it is in biblical books (e.g. Isaiah), not in palaeo-Hebrew script as in the pesharim. Yadin took this as evidence that the Temple Scroll (M. Black and B. Smalley, eds.; The Hague: Mouton, 1974) 19-99. • 7 M . Goshen-Gottstein, "The Psalms Scroll (11QPs»)—A Problem of Canon and Text," Textus 5(1966) 73-78; 48 S. Talmon, "Extra-Canonical Psalms from Qumran—Psalm 151," in idem., The World of Qumran from Within (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1989) 244-72, (originally published in Hebrew, Tarbiz 35[1966] 214-34). 49 "Qumran and Old Testament Criticism," in Qumrân: sa piété, sa théologie et son milieu (BETL 46; ed. M. Delcor; Gemblouz: Duculot, 1978) 163-82. 50 See the review of the debate by G.H. Wilson, "The Qumran Psalms Scroll Reconsidered: Analysis of the Debate," CBQ, 47(1985) 624-42, and the full treatment of the issues by P.W. Flint, "The Psalters at Qumran and the Book of Psalms," (Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Notre Dame, 1993, to be published by Brill). 51 O n the sources of the Temple Scroll see M.O. Wise, A Critical Study of the Temple Saollfiom Qumran Cave 11 (Chicago: The Oriental Institute, 1990).

enjoyed the status of scripture at Qumran. 5 2 Ben Zion Wacholder goes farther, and argues that the author of the Temple Scroll "set out to rival Moses, hoping to succeed where his predecessor had failed" and infers that it was the Torah of the Qumran community. 53 It does, in fact, emphasize matters which are highlighted elsewhere in sectarian documents, such as marital impurity, the purity of the Sanctuary, and sinful wealth, and it presupposes the sectarian 364 day calendar. Yet there is no clear reference to it in the other sectarian literature, in contrast to the abundance of references to the traditional Torah. Yadin's suggestion that the Temple Scroll is "The Book of Meditation" referred to in the Damascus Document and lQSa is not compelling: 54 the book in question is more likely to be the traditional Torah. Some scholars have argued that the Temple Scroll is not a product of the Qumran sect at all, but is rather a traditional pseudepigraphon like Jubilees, that shares some common traditions with the sect.55 Larry Schiffman makes the noteworthy observation that "whereas the other texts from Qumran see the extrabiblical material as derived from inspired biblical exegesis, the author of the Temple Scroll sees it as inherent in the biblical text." 56 It makes no reference to a ‫ י ח ד‬or distinct sectarian organization. Given the extensive correspondence with the sectarian scrolls on halakhic issues, however, the Scroll should be regarded as sectarian, at least in a broad sense. While it was not necessarily produced in or for the ‫ י ח ל‬of the Community Rule, it represents the reformist strands ofJudaism from which that community emerged. It has been suggested that the Temple Scroll is a new Torah for the New Age.57 On this view, the hidden sense of the Law was partially disclosed in such documents as 1QS and CD, but would be available to all surviving Jews in the end-time in a new Torah. This suggestion is unsatisfactory, however. The end-time in the Scrolls is 52

Y. Yadin, The Temple Scroll. The Hidden Law of the Dead Sea Sect (New York: Random House, 1985) 68. 53 B.Z. Wacholder, The Dawn of Qumran (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College, 1983) 228. 54 Y. Yadin, The Temple Scroll (Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1983) 1.394. 55 H. Stegemann, "Das Land in der Tempelrolle und in anderen Texten aus den Qumranfunden," in Das Land Israel in biblischer £eit (G. Strecker, ed.; Göttingen: Vandcnhoeck & Ruprecht. 1983) 154-71; L.H. Schiffman, Sectarian Law in the Dead Sea Saolls (Chico: Scholars Press, 1983) 17. 56 Schiffman, ibid. 57 M. Fishbanc, "Use, Authority and Interpetation of Mikra at Qumran," in M. J . Mulder, ed., Mikra. Text, Translation, Reading and Interpretation of the Hebrew Bible, in Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity (CRINT 2.1; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988) 365. Wise, A Critical Study, 167-79; "The Eschatological Vision of the Temple Scroll," JNES 49(1990) 155-72.

associated with the coming of the messiah, but the king envisaged in the Temple Scroll is conspicuously lacking in messianic traits.58 The Scroll presents a law for this age rather than for the end of days. It is a reformist proposal. We do not know whether its author hoped that it would replace the traditional Torah. If he did, he was disappointed. Those who preserved the Scroll presumably read it in conjunction with the Torah, perhaps interpreting the Torah in its light. The problem presented by the Temple Scroll is extreme, because of the use of divine speech, but analogous problems are presented by a number of other documents. 59 One, known long before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, is the book of Jubilees. Here we have a document, supposedly revealed to Moses by an angel, which covers the same ground as the Book of Genesis but is often at variance with the biblical text. The variation may be understood as making explicit what was thought to be implicit in the text (e.g. the 364 day calendar), but nonetheless it involves an amazing freedom. Some of the novel elements, such as the role of Mastema or Satan, have really no exegetical basis in the biblical text. Jubilees does not challenge the traditional Torah. Rather it provides a complementary revelation which could serve as a guide for the interpretation of the older document, to which it refers as "the first law" (Jub 6:22). Yet it is presented as an independent revelation, not as a midrash or commentary. In this case we have evidence that it was accepted as an authoritative document by some Jews in antiquity. CD 16:2-4 says that the exact determination of the times is stricdy defined in the Book of the Divisions of the Times into their Jubilees and Weeks, and this is surely none other than the book of Jubilees. It is cited as an authoritative source, and there are no grounds for the claim that its authority is less than that of other scriptures. Fragments of at least 14 copies of Jubilees have been found at Qpmran. Only five biblical books (Genesis, Exodus, Deuteronomy, Isaiah and Psalms) are represented by more manuscripts. 60 Jubilees later became part of the canon of the Christian Church in Ethiopia. Various parts of 1 Enoch are also represented in multiple copies at Qumran. 1 Enoch is cited in the New Testament in Jude 14-15, is 58

11QTempIe 57:1-59:11. See my remarks in "Teacher and Messiah. The One Who Will Teach Righteousness at the End of Days," in E. Ulrich andJ.C. VanderKam, ed., The Community of the Renewed Covenant. The Notre Dame Symposium on the Dead Sea Saolls (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 1994) 193-210. 59 See J Strugnell, "Moses-Pseudepigrapha at Qumran," in L.H. Schiffman, ed., Archeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls ( Sheffield: J S O T , 1990) 221-56; Ε. Τον, "The Bible as Reworked, Expanded, and Rephrased in the Qumran Manuscripts," in Ulrich and VanderKam, ed., The Community of the Renewed Covenant, 111-34. 60 See VanderKam, The Dead Sea Saolls Today, 153-55.

cited as Scripture in Barnabas 16:5 and, like Jubilees, was later canonical in the Ethiopian Church. The fact that Enoch and Jubilees survived in Christian circles suggests that they were known more widely than most of the writings found at Qumran. Beckwith has argued that apocryphal books are not cited with such formulae as "it is written" in the Scrolls, but the argument is tendentious. 61 T h e Damascus Document cites a Levi apocryphon with the phrase "of which Levi son of Jacob spoke," but it also introduces biblical citations with the phrases "Moses said" and "Isaiah said." The so-called Testimonia (4Q175) draws passages not only from Deuteronomy and Numbers, but also from the apocryphal Psalms of Joshua. 62 The evidence is sporadic and incomplete, but it is apparent that at least some apocryphal compositions could be cited as authoritative sources. In addition to the few cases where documents are cited, the Scrolls contain a huge corpus of previously unknown writings.63 Many of these writings are not distinctively sectarian. Some, such as the Genesis Apocryphon or the Pseudo-Ezekiel text are adaptations of a biblical prototype. Others, such as the Testaments of Amram and Qahat, are independent pseudepigrapha. In some cases, such as the Pseudo-Daniel literature, it is uncertain whether the fragments represent a re-working of a biblical text or are independent compositions that happen to share common themes and figures with the more familiar Scriptures. At least some of this literature is presented in the form of divine revelation. While we cannot be sure whether or how far these compositions were regarded as authoritative, we must bear in mind that some of the biblical Writings are poorly attested at Qumran. All the books of the Hebrew Bible except Esther have been found among the scrolls,64 but Chronicles is represented by a single scrap. If Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs or Ruth were not known to us as part of the traditional Bible, there would be no reason to think that they were Scripture at Qumran. We have seen that the Writings generally 61

Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon, 75, 358-66. C.A. Ncwsom, "'The 'Psalms of Joshua' from Q u m r a n Cave 4," JJS 39(1988) 56-73. Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon, 75, cites the view of I.H. Eybers that "it would be rash to suppose that it is the Q u m r a n work which is being put side by side with the Pentateuch, rather than the canonical Joshua," but, again, the argument is tendentious and depends on presuppositions about the canon. See I.H. Eybers, "Some Light on the Canon of the Q u m r a n Sect," in Leiman, ed., The Canon and Masorah of the Hebrew Bible, 34. 63 See D. Dimant, "Apocalyptic Texts at Q u m r a n , " in Ulrich and VanderKam, ed., The Community of the Renewed Covenant, 175-91. 64 F.M. Cross," The Ancient Library of Qumran (Garden City: Doublcday, 1961) 40. 62

carried less authority than the Torah and the Prophets. There is no evidence that there was a clear distinction between canonical and non-canonical Writings at Qumran. Jamnia revisited Most of the writings hidden in the caves near the Dead Sea disappeared from the scene of history and played no further part in Jewish or Christian life. Most of the Apocrypha, and all the GrecoJewish literature, vanished from the tradition passed on by the rabbis. Ben Sira is the only one of the traditional Apocrypha cited in the rabbinic corpus, although mention is made of the otherwise unknown works of Ben La'aga (‫ין‬. Sanhédrin 28a) and Ben Tagla (.Koheleth Rabbah 12:12). Origen, in his Letter to Africanus 13, acknowledges the currency of the book of Maccabees, outside the canon, but adds that the Jews not only do not use Tobit and Judith, but do not even have them "in the Hebrew apocrypha." We need not infer that the Hebrew apocrypha was a well-defined category. The point is simply that Tobit and Judith were not current in Hebrew (or Aramaic) in Origen's time. Origen also mentions a "Letter" that appears as part of Jeremiah in the Hebrew but is usually found separately in the Greek. The reference is presumably to the Episde of Jeremiah. 65 Apart from these cases, however, there is remarkably litde controversy about the status of apocryphal writings in the rabbinic tradition. In this shrinking of the corpus of religious literature we discover the true significance of Jamnia for the formation of the canon. Shaye Cohen has argued that Jamnia marked the end ofjewish sectarianism: 'Pharisaic triumph' is not a useful description of the events at Yavneh. Perhaps many, if not most, of the sages there assembled were Pharisees or the descendants of Pharisees, but they made little of their ancestry.. .Yavneh was a grand coalition of different groups and parties, held together by the belief that sectarian self-identification was a thing of the past.

But even this inclusive vision had its limits: Those who refused to join the coalition and insisted on sectarian selfidentification were branded minim and cursed. Those rabbis who could not learn the rules of pluralism and mutual tolerance were banned. 66 65 On the original language of the Episde see C.A. Moore, Daniel, Esther and Jeremiah. The Additions (AB 44; Garden City: Doubleday, 1977) 326-7. 66 S.J.D. Cohen, "The Significance of Yavneh: Pharisees, Rabbis, and the End of Jewish Sectarianism," HUCA 55(1984) 50.

The strand of Judaism that is most prominent in the Dead Sea Scrolls could find no place at Jamnia, since it relied on claims of revelation that were not accepted by the rabbis. Moreover, if most of the rabbis at Jamnia were Pharisees, it was inevitable that Pharisaic opinions would prevail. So it was with the canon. If the twenty-two or twenty-four book canon had taken shape before 70 CE, as seems likely, it was the canon of a party, not of all Jews. After 70, through the influence ofJamnia, other Scriptures were ignored and lost. The rejection of other Scriptures cannot be entirely explained as benign neglect. A saying attributed to R. Akiba proclaimed that one who reads the outside books would have no share in the world to come (m. Sanhednn 10:1). The Talmud explains that "this means the books of the heretics" (b. Sanhednn 100b), which presumably included Christian literature. There is other evidence that Christian writings were specifically rejected: "The Gospels (hagilyonym) and the books of the heretics do not defile the hands" 67 and "the Gospels and the books of heretics are not to be rescued but allowed to burn where they are, names of God and all."68 Reasons can be imagined for excluding some of the Pseudepigrapha and sectarian writings.69 Most obviously, books that had been composed in Greek, such as the Wisdom of Solomon, did not qualify for consideration. Books such as Jubilees, 1 Enoch and the Temple Scroll would have been unacceptable to the Rabbis because of their calendrical teachings. There is no clear evidence that books were excluded because of apocalyptic content. R. Akiba, who pronounced the most severe ban on the "outside books" is credited with an ascent to Paradise (Hag 14b) and with endorsing Bar Kokhba as messiah (j. Ta'anit 4.8), and so he at least can not have been too negatively disposed toward apocalyptic speculation. 70 Yet the fact that the apocalypses relied on special revelations, the virtual equivalent of a voice from heaven, 71

67

Tosefta Yadaim 2:13. G.F. Moore, "The Definition of the Jewish Canon and the Repudiation of Christian Scriptures," in Leiman, ed., The Canon and Masorah 101. O n the word gilyon (alternatively awen gilyori] as a perversion of euaggelion, Gospel, see Moore, ibid., 105. 68 Tosefta Shabbath 13; Moore, "The Definition," 101. 69 S. Zeitlin, "An Historical Study of the Canonization of the Hebrew Scriptures," in Leiman, ed., The Canon and Masorah, 141-99; S.Z. Leiman, "Inspiration and Canonicity," in E.P. Sanders et al., ed., Jewish and Christian S(lf-Def1mtwn (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981 ) 2.56-63.; Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon, 367-69. 70 See the remarks of L. Ginzberg, "Some Observations on the Attitude of the Synagogue towards the Apocalyptic-Eschatological Writings," in Leiman, ed., Canon and Masorah, 142-63. 71 Compare the famous story in h. Baba Metzia 59b, which cites Deut 30:12 ("it is not in heaven") and concludes "we pay no attention to a heavenly voice, because

may have made them less than congenial to the rabbis, although Daniel was too well established to be questioned. T o a great degree, decisions on canonicity may have been determined by pragmatic rather than ideological considerations. 72 The only reason given in the rabbinic texts for the exclusion of books other than the books of the heretics is a late date of composition. Tosefta Tadaim 1:13, after pronouncing on the books of the heretics, adds "the books of the son of Sirach and all books that have been written since his time do not defile the hands." This point is related to the widespread, though not universal, view that prophetic inspiration had ceased in the Persian period. 73 At least it suggests that the Rabbis were aware of a difference between the age of Scripture and their own time. Such considerations may help explain the omission of a relatively recent book like 1 Maccabees. A more weighty concern, however, may have been the need to limit the number of books: "whoever brings into his house more than the twenty-four books introduces confusion into his house" (Ecclesiastes Rabbah 12:12). T h e books included were simply those that were most firmly established in the circles of the Sages who made the decisions. By restricting the number of "properly accredited" books the Sages provided a common frame of reference for their debates and reduced the risk of sectarian division. Their strategy played its part in ensuring the survival of Judaism in a time of crisis. Yet it also involved a goodly measure of loss. The writings retrieved in scraps from the caves of the Dead Sea may not quite contain "the spring of understanding, the fountain of wisdom and the river of knowledge" like the hidden books of 4 Ezra 14, but they do contain a rich and variegated picture of Jewish practices, beliefs and hopes in a period before Judaism and Christianity went their separate ways and sealed their identities in their different conceptions of the canon.

Thou hast long since written in the Torah at Sinai 'after the majority must one incline' (Exod 23:2). 72 Cohen, "The Significance of Yavneh," 17-53. 73 Josephus, Ag Ap 1:40-41; Tosefta Sota 13:2. See F.E. Greenspahn, "Why Prophecy Ceased," JBL 108(1989) 37-49.

PART O N E APOCALYPTICISM

CHAPTER T W O

GENRE, I D E O L O G Y AND SOCIAL M O V E M E N T S IN J E W I S H APOCALYPTICISM

1979 was a landmark year in the study of apocalypticism. In addition to the international conferences at Uppsala 1 and Louvain, 2 it saw the publication of several major studies: the study of the genre in Semeia 14,3 an influential article by Jean Carmignac 4 and the first of a series of studies on apocalypticism and the problem of evil by Paolo Sacchi. 5 Christopher Rowland's The Open Heaven was also completed, though not published in that year. 6 This outpouring reflected a build-up of interest in the subject over the previous decade, and involved attempts both to take stock of the field and to chart new courses. Some trends and points of convergence were evident in these studies of 1979. There was widespread agreement that a distinction should be made between the literary genre apocalypse and the wider, looser categories of "apocalyptic" or "apocalypticism." 7 The primary distinguishing mark of the genre was that the material was presented as revelation. Several of these studies emphasized the "vertical" aspects of apocalypticism: the interest in mysteries and in

1 D. Hellholm, ed., Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East (Tuhingen: Mohr, 1983). 2 J . Lambrecht, ed., L'Apocalypse johannique et l'apocalyptique dans le Nouveau Testament (BETL 53; Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1980). 3 J.J. Collins, ed., Apocalypse. The Morphology of a Genre (Semeia 14; Missoula, M T : Scholars Press, 1979). 4 J . Carmignac, "Qu'est-ce que l'apocalyptique?" RevQ 10(1979-81) 3-33. 5 P. Sacchi, "D 'Libro dei Vigilant!' e l'apocalittica," Henoch 1(1979) 42-92. 6 C. Rowland, The Open Heaven. A Study of Apocalyptic in Judaism and Early Christianity (New York: Crossroad, 1983). Ithamar Gruenwald's study Apocalyptic and Merkauah Mysticism (AGJU 14; Leiden: Brill, 1980) appeared the following year. 7 This distinction was already made by Klaus Koch, The Rediscoveiy of Apocalyptic (SBT 2/22; Naperville, IL: Allenson, 1972) and taken up by Paul Hanson, "Apocalypse, Genre," "Apocalypticism," IDBSup 27-34. See also M.E. Stone, "lists of Revealed Things in the Apocalyptic Literature," in F.M. Cross et al. ed., Magnalia Dei• The Mighty Acts of God (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1976) 439-43 and idem, "Apocalyptic Literature," in M.E. Stone, ed., Jewish Writings from the Second Temple Period (CRINT 2/2; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984) 392-93; M.A. Knibb, "Prophecy and the Emergence of the Jewish Apocalypses," in R. Coggins et al., ed., Israel's Prophetic Tradition. Essays in Honour of Peter Ackroyd (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982) 160-61.

the heavenly world. 8 This emphasis was largely in reaction against the one-sided emphasis on eschatology which had dominated study of the field in the past. The change in emphasis corresponded to a shift in the focus of the study of apocalypticism, away from the alleged "dawn of apocalyptic" 9 in prophetic texts of the post-exilic period to the Pseudepigrapha, and especially to the Enoch corpus, which had been thrust to the fore by the publication of the Aramaic fragments from Qumran. 1 0 The Uppsala Colloquium, however, represented, quite deliberately, a very wide spectrum of views. The participants were drawn from diverse fields and had diverse ideas of what was meant by apocalypticism. After some 25 papers, which had not been circulated in advance, there was one session devoted to seeking consensus. When the participants voted contra άφηύίοηβπι, pro descrìptione,u in a phrase often quoted since then, this did not represent a consensus on proper procedure, but was an expression of fatigue and a recognition that much more time would be needed to mediate the differing viewpoints. The final resolution was a diplomatic evasion of the issue at the end of a very stimulating, but exhausting, conference. Consensus, of course, is rarely found in scholarly discussion, and the disagreements on the subject of apocalypticism are scarcely greater than those in other areas of biblical studies. There is, at least, general agreement on the corpus of relevant literature. The most heated debates are not so much over the understanding of this material but over the proper use of terminology. The basic problem here lies in the propensity of scholars to select some feature of an apocalyptic writing that happens to interest them, and arbitrarily declare it to be the essence of "apocalyptic" or apocalypticism. So the introductory essay in a recent volume on Apocalyptic and the New Testament notes (with approval) that scholars who have explored the relationship between apocalyptic and Jesus or the apostle Paul, like Schweitzer and Käsemann, have avoided basing their research on assumptions drawn from a study of the literary genre and have instead focused on apocalyptic as a theological concept." 12 8 So especially Rowland, Gruenwald. Note also the subsequent studies of I. Culianu, Psychonadia / (Leiden: Brill, 1983) and C. Kappler, ed.. Apocalypses et Voyages dans L'Au-Delà (Paris: Cerf, 1987). 9 P.D. Hanson, The Dawn of Apocalyptic (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975). 10 J . T . Milik, The Books of Enoch (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1976). 11 Hellholm, Apocalypticism, 2. 12 R.E. Sturm, "Defining the Word 'Apocalyptic': A Problem in Biblical Criticism," i n j . Marcus and M.L. Soards, eds., Apocalyptic and the New Testament. Essays in

GENRE, IDEOLOGY AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS

27

The advantage of "a theological concept," from this point of view, is that it is not constrained by the evidence of the ancient apocalyptic literature, "much of which is indeed abstruse and fantastic" 13 but can be defined by the theologian, in whatever way is most convenient for the explication of Jesus or Paul. Whether or not this theological concept accurately reflects the thought ofJesus or Paul, it can only compound the terminological confusion in modern scholarship. There can be no consensus in the definition of a term such as "apocalyptic" unless we accept the constraints of a specific body of evidence. T h e observation of Klaus Koch remains true: the word "apocalyptic" refers first of all to a body of literature, and any analysis of the phenomenon must begin with an analysis of the literature. 14 This is not to say that apocalypticism should be reduced to the literary genre, or viewed only as a literary convention. It is simply to affirm the methodological necessity of a common starting point. T h e term "apocalyptic" refers first and foremost to the kind of material found in apocalypses. T o use the word in any other way is to invite terminological confusion. T H E DISCUSSION OF THE G E N R E

My own contribution to the debate in 1979 was concerned with the definition and delineadon of the literary genre, as part of an SBL task force whose findings were published in Semeia 14. We proposed a definition that was based on a combination of form (narrative framework, revelation mediated by an otherworldly being) and content (disclosure of supernatural world and of eschatological future). In retrospect, I would, inevitably, do some things differently. In Semeia 14, we proposed a six fold typology. We distinguished two broad types, the "historical" apocalypses such as Daniel, and the heavenly ascents, often associated with Enoch. That distinction is, I think, fundamental, even though we find mixed types (e.g. the Similitudes of Enoch). I would not go so far as Martha Himmelfarb, who would argue that we have two different genres here, although I appreciate the basis for her argument. 15 We further divided each of these types into three sub-types, on the basis of their eschatology. While I think these distinctions were accurate, I have found them

Honor of J. Louis Martyn (JSNTS 24; Sheffield: J S N T , 1989) 37 (emphasis added). Similarly M.C. de Boer, "Paul and Jewish Apocalyptic Eschatology," ibid., 187. 15 Sturm, "Defining the Word," 37. 14 Koch, Rediscovery, 23. 15 M. Himmelfarb, Tours o f / M (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983) 61.

less significant in my further work, and I would not now insist on them. In the Jewish apocalypses, at least, the main distinction is between the eschatology of the "historical" works and that of the ascents, and so the two-fold typology is adequate. In my own discussion of the Jewish apocalypses I identified some partial texts (e.g. Daniel 7-12; Jubilees 23) as apocalypses. I would now speak simply of the dominant genre of these works as wholes. I would also allow for cases of mixed genre (e.g. Jubilees) which have significant affinities with more than one genre. Finally, I would include a rather general statement of function, in the definition, a point to which I will return below. I regard these points as relatively minor modifications of the analysis in Semeia 14. There has been considerable discussion of the genre in the last decade. Among the more noteworthy contributions should be mentioned the text-linguistic studies of David Hellholm on Revelation and the Shepherd of Hermas. 16 While insights from this approach have helped clarify some points in the general discussion, such as the importance of distinguishing between different levels of abstraction, it has not, as yet, been widely adopted. For many scholars it remains more mysterious than the texts it seeks to clarify, but I would like to suspend judgment on it until a greater body of such studies becomes available. Instead I would like to focus on two issues that concern the relation between the genre and the broader phenomenon of apocalypticism. First is the question whether the apocalypses have a significant common content, which implies a world view that was distinctive in the ancient world. Second is the historical development of the genre and its relation to specific social groups or movements. 1. Form and Content In an article published in 1979, at almost exactly the same time as Semeia 14, the late Jean Carmignac argued that "l'Apocalyptique" is a literary genre that describes heavenly revelations by means of symbols, in short that it is essentially a literary style and that there is common content in only the most general terms.17 A number of scholars have taken similar positions. Christopher Rowland pro-

lfi D. Hcllholm, "The Problem of Apocalyptic Genre and the Apocalypse of John," Semeia 36 (1986) 13-64; Dos Visionenbuch des Hermas als Apokalypse: Formgeschichtliehe und texttheoretische Studien zu einer literarischen Gattung. (ConNT 13.1. Lund: Gleerup, 1980). 17 Carmignac, "Qu'est-ce que l'apocalyptique?" 20.

posed that "apocalyptic seems essentially to be about the revelation of the divine mysteries" and emphasized the diversity of the contents. 18 Relying on Rowland's survey, John Barton drew the conclusion that "the attempt to find any unifying theme among all the apocalypses that are extant is doomed to failure." 19 He would allow that the adjective "apocalyptic" has meaning ("concerned with the disclosure of secrets") but finds it too broad to be useful. The noun "apocalyptic" (and presumably "apocalypticism") is for him devoid of content and it makes no sense to speak of an apocalyptic movement. At the Uppsala conference Hartmut Stegemann also argued that Apokalyptik is only a literary phenomenon, concerned with the revelation of secrets.20 He allowed, however, that the term might also refer to the Wirkungsgeschichte of apocalypses, e.g. to the influence of the Enoch tradition on the Qumran community. T h e issue here is not a theoretical one of how a genre should, in principle be defined. Genres may be defined in various ways and on various levels of abstraction. It is possible to identify a corpus of texts which are "revelations of heavenly mysteries" but that corpus will be much broader than what is usually associated with the word apocalypse. T h e real issue here is whether there is a sub-group of revelations which can be defined on the basis of content, or to put the matter another way, whether those texts which are generally regarded as apocalypses (Daniel, 1 Enoch, Revelation etc.) have significant common content which distinguishes them from other revelations. With the exception of Carmignac, scholars do not call all the visions in the Hebrew Bible "apocalypses." The analysis of the genre in Semeia 14, which was based on content as well as form, argued that there is indeed a common content, which is broadly constitutive of a world-view, which was both distinctive and significant in late antiquity. T o be sure, the content common to all the apocalypses is fairly abstract and general. T h e mysteries they disclose involve a view of human aflairs in which major importance is attached to the influence of the supernatural world and the expectation of eschatological judgment. Apocalypses may contain all sorts of data, about cosmological secrets, halachic instructions or sapiential reflection, which is all highly important for the interpretation of the individual

18

Rowland, The Open Heaven, 70-72. J. Barton, Oracles of God. Perceptions of Ancient Prophecy in Israel after the Exile (London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1986) 201. 50 H. Stegemann, "Die Bedeutung der Qumranfunde fur die Erforschung der Apokalyptik," in Hellholm, ed., Apocalypticism, 498. 19

texts, but the co-ordinates of the world-view are set by the orientation to the supernatural world and the eschatological expectation. Scholars such as Rowland or Barton who see only the variety of contents miss the forest for the trees. They are also misled by a tendency to equate eschatology with the kind of public historical crisis envisaged in Revelation, and a failure to recognize the importance of personal eschatology, the judgment of the dead, which is of crucial importance in both the "historical" apocalypses and in the heavenly ascents. This world-view, with its eschatological dimension, is historically much more specific and limited than the phenomenon of dreams and visions, or the interest in the revelation of mysteries. I would, however, emphasize that the world-view that is common to all the apocalypses is much broader and less specific than what is usually called apocalypticism in modern scholarship. The latter is usually based only on the "historical" type of apocalypse such as Daniel and Revelation, and often involves the hasty generalization of motifs that are relatively rare (e.g. the division between the two ages in 4 Ezra). If apocalypticism is understood as the world view of the apocalypses, then it is a broad world view, within which several more specific ideologies and movements can be identified. At the very least we need to distinguish between the "historical" type of apocalypticism, typified by Daniel and Revelation, and the more cosmic, mystical, orientation of the heavenly ascents. These smaller groupings may well be more helpful in interpreting a particular text. Nonetheless, two points should be made. 1 In the interest of consistent terminology, it is better to retain "apocalypse" as the inclusive term, which embraces different sub-groups than to restrict the label arbitrarily to one sub-group. A definition of "apocalypse" or "apocalypticism" which excludes either Daniel and Revelation, on the one hand, or the heavenly ascents, on the other, is confusing rather than helpful. 2 T h e content of the genre as a whole is still distinctive, at least in the context of Judaism through the first Christian centuries. Ben Sira, First Maccabees, Josephus, the Mishnah, all attest forms of Judaism that are clearly distinct from apocalypticism, even on the broadest definition of the latter. Obviously, the distinctiveness of the apocalyptic world-view decreases with time. T h e category is more useful with reference to the second century BCE than to the second century CE. Most scholars, however, would grant that the world-view of the Book of the Watchers differs significantly from anything that preceded it in the Jewish

tradition. 21 There is greater continuity with the Hebrew prophets in the case of Daniel, but there too there was significant novelty, both in the degree of interest in supernatural powers and in the eschatological hope for resurrection and judgment. 22 2. The Historical Development T h e question of distinctiveness, then, leads us to the second major issue in the current discussion, the historical development of both the genre and the world view. The definition of the genre proposed in Semeia 14 might be described as a "common core" definition: it attempts to extract characteristics which are common to all exemplars of the genre. The range of material surveyed was essentially the same as in the Uppsala conference: the Mediterranean world and the Near East over a period of roughly 500 years. This attempt to find a core of defining characteristics is certainly a common way of defining a genre, perhaps the most common. 23 It has been challenged, however, both in the general field of literary criticism and in its application to the genre apocalypse, on the grounds that it is ahistorical. In his helpful introduction to the theory of genres, Kinds of Literature, Alastair Fowler has argued that genres are "positively resistant to definition" and that the expectation of necessary elements or defining characteristics, which is almost universal among critics writing about genre, is "without any sufficient basis.24'‫ י‬For Fowler, genres are looser historical entities, held together by "family resemblances" and genetic connections. 25 A young Dutch scholar, E. J . Tigchelaar, has argued for a similar view of genre in the case of

21

M. Barker, The Older Testament. The Survival of Themesfromthe Ancient Royal Cult in Sectarian Judaism and Early Christianity (London: SPCK, 1987) is exceptional, if not unique, in arguing that 1 Enoch is representative of the traditional religion of Jerusalem. 22 O n the relation of the early apocalypses to traditional Israelite religion see my essay, "The Place of Apocalypticism in the Religion of Israel," in P.D. Miller, P.D. Hanson and S.D. McBride, eds., Ancient Israelite Religion. Essays in Honor of Frank Moore Cross (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987) 539-58. 23 For a survey of concepts of genre in literary criticism see A. Fowler, Kinds of Literature. An Introduction to the Theory of Genres and Modes (Cambridge: Harvard, 1982) 37-53. 24 Ibid., 39. 25 T h e "family resemblance" approach to the apocalyptic genre was already advocated b y j . G . Gammie, "The Classification, Stages of Growth, and Changing Intentions in the Book of Daniel," JBL 95 (1976) 193.

the apocalyptic literature, although as yet he has not worked out its application at any length. 26 Three issues may be distinguished here: a) the possibility of definition, b) the importance of diachronic development in the understanding of the genre and c) the genetic dimension. a. The Possibility of Definition Fowler's contention that "genres are positively resistant to definition" does not withstand serious scrutiny. What cannot be defined can not be distinguished and so cannot be recognized at all. If Fowler can recognize a genre "tragedy" he must have at least an implicit definition which enables him to distinguish tragedies from other dramas. His own resistance to definitions is due in large part to the inconsistency of traditional usage. "Oedipus at Colonus" is traditionally called a tragedy, although it lacks most of the classic characteristics of the genre. Similarly, in the Jewish Pseudepigrapha, the Apocalypse of Moses (a variant of the Life of Adam and Eve) is not an apocalypse in any modern sense of the word, and the Testament of Abraham is not a testament. T o say that traditional usage is not consistent, however, is not to say that consistent usage is impossible. In the context of modern scholarship, genres are analytical categories, which do not necessarily coincide with the use of genre labels in antiquity. b. Diachronic Development We must readily agree with Fowler's insistence that genres have a diachronic dimension, and change over time. Definitions are necessarily synchronic, and some critics have inferred that the definition of apocalypse in Semeia 14 is ahistorical.27 This charge seems to me to misunderstand the purpose of a definition. Beginning with the work of Koch, the study of the literary genre was an attempt to focus the discussion on specific texts, in reaction against vague generalizations about the "essence of apocalyptic" or theological concepts. The definition of the genre in Semeia 14 did not include any statement of function. It has been widely criticized on this point, 2 " but reluctance 26 E.J. Tigchelaar, Apocalyptiek, Begrrp en Onbegnp (Groningen: University of Groningen, 1985); "More on Apocalyptic and Apocalypses," JSJ 18 (1987) 137-44. See now his book, Prophets of Old and the Day of the End (Leiden: Brill, 1996) 1-15. 27 So F. Garcia Martinez, "Encore l'Apocalyptique," JSJ 17 (1987) 229; Tigchelaar, "More on Apocalyptic and Apocalypses," 138; K. Rudolph, "Apokalyptik in der Diskussion," in Hcllholm, ed., Apocalypticism, 775. 2B See Hellholm, "The Apocalypse ofJohn and the Problem of Genre," Semeia 36 (1986) 69-70.

to posit a single function for the genre arose precisely from an awareness of the variety of historical settings in which it might be employed. 29 The paradigm of the genre is like a grammatical paradigm, helpful for analysing particular statements, but not in itself the vehicle of meaning. Meaning is found in statements, in which the grammar is actualized and applied. Now it is quite true that grammatical paradigms also have a function: to clarify grammar and enhance communication. In the same way the genre apocalypse can be said to have a function: e.g. "to legitimate the transcendent authorization of the message." 30 I would now accept the amendment to the definition of the genre offered in Semeia 36, in the light of the suggestions of Hellholm and Aune: an apocalypse is intended to interpret present earthly circumstances in the light of the supernatural world and of the future, and to influence both the understanding and the behavior of the audience by means of divine authority. 31

This definition of the function of the genre, however, is rather different from those which have prevailed in previous study, e.g. "for the consolation of a group in crisis." The more specific functions, which tie the genre to precise social settings (such as "a group in crisis"), fit some apocalypses but not all. It does not seem to me that social setting can be inferred from literary genre. I would still want to emphasize that the genre can accommodate a considerable range of social settings, and that these have to be established by historical study. A definition, then, serves not only to identify the common elements, but also to provide a foil against which the variations in particular works can be highlighted. My own study of the Jewish apocalypses, The Apocalyptic Imagination,32 differs from other books on the subject such as those of D.S. Russell33 or Christopher Rowland, 34 precisely in the attempt to deal with the individual apocalypses in their historical context. Synchronic and diachronic elements are complementary aspects of the study of a genre, and should not be regarded as mutually exclusive. 29 This point is appreciated by Tigchelaar, "More on Apocalyptic and Apocalypses," 138. 30 D. Aune, "The Apocalypse of J o h n and the Problem of Genre," Semeia 36 (1986) 87. 31 A. Yarbro Collins, "Introduction: Early Christian Apocalypticism," Semeia 36 (1986) 7. 32 The Apocalyptic Imagination (New York: Crossroad, 1984). 33 D.S. Russell, The Method and Message of Jewish Apocalyptic (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1964). 34 Rowland, The Open Heaven.

Nonetheless, the call for more attention to the diachronic developments can be fruitful, and certainly points the discussion in the right direction. This is most obvious in the case of the earliest apocalypses, such as Daniel and the "Book of the Watchers" in 1 Enoch, which are experimental compositions, where "features belonging to other genres are assembled into a new work of art." 35 The eventual emergence of "apocalypse" as a genre label, at the end of the first century CE, was possible because the literary forms had attained a measure of stability. We should be wary, however, of attempts to explain all differences between individual works by developmental theories. The differences between the Book of the Watchers and 4 Ezra are due less to their respective places in the development of the genre than to the fact that they were informed by different theological traditions and were written in very different circumstances. The development of a genre is not mechanical and cannot be plotted on a straight line. c. The Genetic Dimension Family resemblances derive from biological relationships. By anain literature, the basis of resemblance lies in literary tradition. What produces generic resemblances...is tradition: a sequence of influence and imitation and inherited codes connecting works in the genre. 36

There is obvious merit in this observation. In the apocalyptic literature, we can speak of an Enoch tradition and a Daniel tradition, the latter including Revelation and 4 Ezra, and of the influence of both traditions on the Similitudes of Enoch. Such tracing of particular developments is certainly necessary, but it can be seen as complementary to the "common core" type of definition rather than as an alternative to it. Some recent critics, however, would use the criterion of genetic relationships to restrict the field of apocalypticism to Jewish and Christian material. According to Tigchelaar (141), "Seeing genre as a historical group with family resemblances restricts the generic analysis to texts which are genetically related." 37 He would exclude "the so-called Greek and Roman apocalypses" from the discussion, pending proof of genetic connections. F. Garcia Martinez has argued even more vehemently against the perspective of the religions35 36 37

Tigchelaar, "More on Apocalypses and Apocalyptic," 139. Fowler, Kinds of Literature, 42. Tigchelaar, "More on Apocalypses and Apocalyptic," 141.

geschichtliche Schule which was presupposed both in the Uppsala Conference and in Semeia 14. For him, one of the "firmly established results" of the Uppsala Conference is that the "history of religions" approach must be abandoned, because it leads to confusion. 38 This attempt to confine the genre to Jewish and Christian material cannot be justified on either historical or literary grounds. Alastair Fowler, a leading proponent of the "family resemblance" approach, issues an important caveat: In generic resemblance, the direct line of descent is not so dominant that genre theory can be identified with source criticism. We need to leave room for polygenesis...and for more remote influences...Codes often come to a writer indirecdy, deviously, remotely, at haphazard, rather than by simple chronological lines of descent. 39

In fact, the genesis of the genre apocalypse in Judaism remains uncertain. 40 There are obvious lines of continuity with prophetic visions, but also with Babylonian dream interpretation. Some of the most stimulating contributions of the last decade have explored possible genetic connections between Babylonian material and Enoch and Daniel. 41 T h e relationship between Jewish and Persian apocalypses remains in dispute, but at present the evidence does not permit us to rule out a genetic connection there. 42 Influence of Greek and Roman material remains a live possibility throughout the history of the genre in Judaism and Christianity. T h e religionsgeschichtliche approach to apocalypticism has always focused on the eastern Mediterranean world in late antiquity where historical relationships are distincdy possible. It has never extended its phenomenological horizons to include, say, the Nordic Voluspa. 43 A truly phenomenological study of apocalyptic and related materials without restriction of time and place might well be interesting, but that is not what was attempted at Uppsala. Even an approach that is focused on genetic relationships cannot afford to treat the Jewish and Christian material in isolation.

38 Garcia Martinez, "Encore l'Apocalyptique," 228-29. Nonetheless he has contributed to the volume edited by Kappler, Apocalypses et Voyages dans L'Au-Delà, which is conceived from a history of religions perspective. 39 Fowler, Kinds of Literature, 43. 40 See my comments in The Apocalyptic Imagination, 19-32. 41 J . C . VanderKam, Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic Tradition (CBQMS 16; Washington: CBA, 1984); H. Kvanvig, Roots of Apocalyptic (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1987). 42 See A. Hultgàrd, "Bahman Yasht: A Persian Apocalypse," in J.J. Collins and J H. Charlesworth, ed. Mysteries and Revelations (Sheffield: J S O T , 1991) 114-34. 43 Pace Garcia Martinez, "Encore l'apocalyptique," 228, citing Lars Hartman.

The most notable and influential attempt in the last decade to treat apocalypticism as a single tradition has been that of the Italian scholar Paolo Sacchi. 44 Sacchi's work has been primarily focused on the Enoch corpus, but it is presented as an approach to Jewish apocalypticism as a whole. Instead of surveying the entire field and looking for common elements, he starts from a particular text, the Book of the Watchers, which he takes to be the oldest apocalypse. He then attempts to discover the key to the system of thought in this book and finds it in the explanation of evil, in the idea that evil is before human will as the consequence of an original sin, which has irremediably corrupted Creation. This idea, then, becomes for Sacchi the essence of apocalypticism. He can trace its influence clearly in the Enoch corpus, and he finds it in somewhat different form in 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch. Sacchi also finds a place for Daniel in this trajectory, although this is disputed by his disciple, Boccacini.45 His ideas have been used by Garcia Martinez to argue that apocalypticism has a generative role in the sectarian writings from Qumran. 4 6 There is no doubt that Sacchi has pointed to an issue of major importance in several apocalyptic texts and his work is especially helpful in understanding the Enoch material. As an approach to the phenomenon of apocalypticism, however, it has serious disadvantages. Even if the Book of the Watchers is the oldest apocalypse, it does not follow that it should be normative for the notion of apocalypticism. 47 As Sacchi himself notes, it is in many ways distinctive, and atypical of the corpus. If we were to restrict the corpus of apocalyptic works to a tradition genetically connected with the Book of the Watchers we would have a very small corpus, excluding even 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch which Sacchi regards as apocalyptic. T h e origin of evil is not a primary concern of Daniel. Yet Daniel is at least as influential as the Book of the Watchers on the later apocalyptic tradition. Apocalypticism cannot be defined on the basis of a single book and cannot be restricted to a single strand of tradition.

44 Sacchi's essays arc now collected in his L'afwcalittica giudaica e ta sua storia (Brescia: Paideia, 1990). 45 G. Boccacini, "E Daniele un tcsto apocalittico? Una (ri)dcfinizione del pensiero del Libro di Daniele in rapporto al Libro dei Sogni e all'apocalittica," Henoch 9 (1987) 267-99 4 ‫ ״‬F. Garcia Martinez, "Les Traditions Apocalyptiques a Qumrân," in C. Kappler, ed., Apocalypses et Voyages dans l'Au-Dela (Paris: Cerf, 1987) 201-35. 47 See the criticisms of Tigchelaar, "More on Apocalyptic and Apocalypses," 143.

GENRE IDEOLOGY AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS

37

APOCALYPTIC MOVEMENTS

From what we have seen thus far it should be obvious that it is a gross over-simplification to speak of "the apocalyptic movement." 48 At the least, we must allow for several movements, at different times, not necessarily connected with each other genetically. Moreover, we should not necessarily posit a community or movement behind every text, although it is the current fashion to do so. There is little evidence that a movement, apocalyptic or other, lies behind a work such as 4 Ezra. T h e main difficulty in speaking about "apocalyptic movements" in ancient Judaism does not lie in the meaning of the term, but in the lack of social documentation. A movement might reasonably be characterized as apocalyptic if it shares the world-view typical of the apocalypses. T h e most straightforward example would be a community which used apocalypses as its typical form of expression. The "chosen righteous" of the Enoch tradition may be a case in point, although we can say very little about them as a community. 49 A movement or community might also be apocalyptic if it were shaped to a significant degree by a specific apocalyptic tradition, or if its world view could be shown to be similar to that of the apocalypses in a distinctive way. T h e Essene movement and Qumran community would seem to qualify on both counts. 50 The point at issue here is not the presence of apocalyptic materials in the Qumran library, which is not necessarily significant, but their role in the major sectarian rules, C D and 1QS, which must be taken as authoritative statements of the self-understanding of the sect. T h e analogies between 1 Enoch, Jubilees and CD have been rehearsed repeatedly in recent years. It has even been argued (unjustifiably in my opinion) that Enoch and Jubilees are Essene.51 C D explicitly alludes both to the Watchers and to Jubilees, and the line of influence is not in dispute. For our present context it will suffice to point to the Discourse of the Two Spirits, which forms the metaphysical backdrop of the Community Rule. Here human life is 48 In fairness to W. Schmithals, The Apocalyptic Movement: Introduction and Interpretation ((Nashville: Abingdon, 1975) it should be noted that the book originally appeared as Die Apokalyptik: Einfiihrung und Deutung (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1973). 49 See The Apocalyptic Imagination, 56-63. 50 See my essay, "Was the Dead Sea Sect an Apocalyptic Community?" in this volume, and my book, Apocalypticism in the Dead Sea Saolls (London: Roudedge, 1997). 51 P.R. Davies, Behind the Essenes. History and Ideology in the Dead Sea Saolls (BJS 94; Adanta: Scholars Press, 1987) 107-34.

understood as an arena of conflict between spirits or angels of Light and Darkness, which will culminate in an eschatological finale, with "everlasting blessing and eternal joy in life without end" for the one party and "shameful extinction in the fire of the dark regions" for the other. The doctrine of the two Spirits is not derived from Enoch or Daniel, and may well be indebted to Persian sources, but the world-view is quintessentially apocalyptic, in its orientation to the supernatural world and its eschatological expectation. T o say that Qumran was an apocalyptic community is not, of course, to describe it exhaustively. As we have seen, apocalypticism allows of many variations and can be combined with various theological traditions. Qumran can be called a halachic community as well as an apocalyptic one. Equally, there is no reason to take Qumran as a paradigm for the social setting of apocalypticism. The designation "apocalyptic" however draws attention to an important aspect of the world-view of Qumran, which serves to relate it to some strands of ancient Judaism and to distinguish it from others. CONCLUSION

The study of apocalypticism has had to sail between the Scylla of those who would identify it with a highly specific tradition and the Charybdis of those who would empty it of all content. Both extremes should be avoided. "Apocalyptic" is an ambivalent term, insofar as it refers to different kinds of material, but it is not significantly more ambivalent than other terms such as prophecy or wisdom that we freely use to characterize the ancient literature. The way to overcome the ambiguity is not by rhetorical flourishes banning all use of the term (and thereby making room for other demons worse than the first)52 but by qualifying it and making distinctions where necessary. The use of the term should be controlled by analogy with the apocalyptic texts, and not allowed to float freely as an intuitive "theological concept." And it must always be kept in mind that the debates about definitions and terminology are only prolegomena to the study of the apocalyptic texts.53 52

E.g. the adoption of the term "millenarian" by P.R. Davies, "The Social World of Apocalyptic Writings," in P.R. Ackroyd, ed., The Social World of Ancient Israel (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989) 253. 53 Several major studies of individual apocalypses have appeared in recent years. Note M.E. Stone, Fourth Ezra (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990); J.J. Collins, Daniel (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993); P. Tiller, A Commentary on the Animal Apocalypse of 1 Enoch (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993); D.C. Harlow, The Greek Apocalypse of Baruch (3 Baruch) in Hellenistic Judaism and Early Christianity (Leiden: Brill, 1996).

CHAPTER THREE

T H E PLACE O F APOCALYPTICISM IN T H E RELIGION O F ISRAEL

In a seminal essay, published in 1969, F.M. Cross claimed that "in many respects the most serious lacuna in the study of apocalyptic has been in the early era, in its relations to older biblical religion. ,, ‫י‬ Much study has been devoted to this issue in the intervening years, but the lacuna has not been definitively filled. Instead, expanding research on the apocalyptic literature has shown that the issue is even more complex than had been thought and that any theory of "the origins of apocalyptic" necessarily involves some over-simplification and confusion. It is now widely recognized that the word "apocalyptic" used as a noun obscures some quite basic distinctions. In 1970, K. Koch distinguished between "apocalyptic as a literary type" and "apocalyptic as a historical movement. 2‫ יי‬This distinction was refined by P.D. Hanson in 1975 in his definitions of "apocalypse" as a literary genre, "apocalypticism" as the ideology of a particular kind of socioreligious movement, and "apocalyptic eschatology" as a religious perspective that is not confined to either apocalypses or apocalyptic movements. 3 While these distinctions are quite fundamental, it is also important to appreciate the relationship between the three terms. As Koch already argued, the starting point for any discussion of "apocalyptic" matters must lie in those texts which are recognized as apocalypses. 4 Apocalyptic eschatology is most appropriately defined as the kind of 1

F.M. Cross, "New Directions in the Study of Apocalyptic,"Apocalypticism, JTC 6(1969) 161. 2 K. Koch, Ratlos vor der Apokalyptik (Gütersloh: Mohn, 1970; English trans. M. Kohl, The Rediscovery ofApocalyptic [SBT 2/22; Naperville: Allenson, 1972]). 5 P.D. Hanson, "Apocalypticism," IDBSup, 28-34. M.E. Stone ("Lists of Revealed Things in Apocalyptic Literature," in F.M. Cross et al., ed., Magnalia Dei, The Mighty Acts of God [Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday & Co., 1976] 414-52) distinguishes between apocalypse and apocalypticism or apocalyptic, in a manner closer to Koch. 4 Koch, The Rediscovery, 23. Koch's list (Daniel, 1 Enoch, 2 Baruch, 4 Ezra, Apocalypse ofAbraham, Revelation) is too brief. For the full corpus, sceJ.J. Collins, ed., Apocalypse: The Morphology of a Genre, Semeia 14 (1979). The list of Jewish apocalypses should at least include 2 Enoch,3 Baruch, and Apocalypse of Zephaniah, and arguably also Jubilees and Testament of Abraham. Most of these texts can be found in J . H . Charlesworth, ed., The Old Testament Pseudepig rapha, vol. 1: Apocalyptic Literature and Testaments (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday & Co., 1983).

eschatology that is typical of apocalypses, although it may also be found elsewhere. The movements most appropriately called apocalyptic are those which either produced apocalypses or were characterized by the beliefs and attitudes typical of the genre. 5 Whether some postexilic prophecy should be called apocalyptic or taken to attest an apocalyptic movement depends on our assessment of the similarities between this material and the literary genre apocalypse. One of the problems that has beset the quest for "the origin of apocalyptic" is that the apocalypses are not simply uniform but contain diverse subgenres and motifs that may be traced to different sources. 6 If we wish to arrive at an understanding of the historical development of apocalypticism, it is necessary to differentiate the various apocalyptic texts and the movements that may be inferred from them. T h e two major types of apocalypse—the "historical apocalypse," characterized by an extended review of history in the guise of prophecy, and the otherworldly journey 7 —are both first exemplified in developed form in the Hellenistic period, in the books of Daniel and 1 Enoch. It is on the development of this material that we wish to focus here. The dominant trend in recent scholarship on apocalyptic origins has sought to establish an unbroken connection with postexilic prophecy. 8 O. Plöger believed that a selection of postexilic eschatological passages such as Isaiah 24-27; Zechariah 12-14; and Joel could produce a line, w h e n j o i n e d together, that leads f r o m the older restoration eschatology, which is certainly within the sphere of influence of the pre-exilic p r o p h e t i c promises, to the r a t h e r different, dualistic a n d apocalyptic f o r m of eschatology, such as we find in a fairly complete f o r m in the Book of Daniel. 9 5 See further my discussion in The Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to the Jewish Matrix of Christianity (New York: Crossroad, 1984), chap. 1. 6 See my discussion of the forms of apocalyptic literature in Daniel, with an Introduction to Apocalyptic Literature (FOTL 10; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984). 7 For the typology, see J.J. Collins, "The Jewish Apocalypses," Semeia 14 (1979) 12-15, and The Apocalyptic Imagination, chap. 1. 8 The rival thesis of G. von Rad (Die Theologie des Alten Testaments [5th ed., Munich: Kaiser, 1968] 2.316-38) that apocalypticism is derived from wisdom has stimulated much discussion but won little following. For a recent review of scholarship, see M. Knibb, "Prophecy and the Emergence of the Jewish Apocalypses," Israel's Prophetic Tradition: Essays in Honour of Peter Ackroyd (ed. R. Coggins, A. Phillips, and M. Knibb; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982) 155-80. An important by-product of the discussion has been the observation of affinities between apocalypticism and "mantic wisdom" (H.-P. Müller. "Mantische Weisheit und Apokalyptik," VTSup 22 [1972] 269-93). 9 O. Plöger, Theocracy and Eschatology (Richmond: Knox, 1968) 108.

THE PLACE OF APOCALYPTICISM IN THE RELIGION OF ISRAEL

41

Plöger admitted that the line was a broken one but affirmed continuity nonetheless and related the whole development to the rise of the Hasidim, who are known from the Maccabean books. Hanson also views Daniel as one station along a continuum reaching from pre-exilic prophecy to full-grown apocalyptic, very much at home on Jewish soil and manifesting foreign borrowing only as peripheral embellishments. 10

Hanson, however, has denied that the development of apocalypticism can be attributed to a single movement or party. Since he dates compositions such as Isaiah 24 72‫־‬earlier than Plöger, he posits a gap in the continuum in the fourth century BCE. The later apocalypses are analogous to the postexilic prophecies in their revival of ancient myth and their sociological matrix but are not the products of a continuous movement." It is fair to say that Plöger and Hanson have concentrated on the development of cosmic eschatology, which they regard as the heart of apocalypticism, and trace the connections primarily with Daniel rather than Enoch. 12 Even in the case of Daniel, many scholars have questioned whether cosmic eschatology is an adequate rubric for understanding the book. O n the one hand, there has been renewed interest in the visionary form of the material, which also has biblical precedents, to be sure. 13 O n the other hand, some features of Daniel's eschatology, which are not attested in late prophecy, especially the belief in resurrection, can hardly be regarded as peripheral embellishments. 14 Continuity with the biblical tradition is less obvious in the journeys of Enoch than in the symbolic visions of Daniel. Plöger's thesis, which sought to tie the development of apocalypticism to a particular party, is especially vulnerable. Both Daniel and 1 Enoch provide internal evidence of developing movements in the pre-Maccabean period. These movements are not related to Plöger's eschatological conventicles but in each case have strong links with the eastern Diaspora. 10

P.D. Hanson, "Old Testament Apocalyptic Reexamined," in idem, ed., Visionaries and Their Apocalypses (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983) 53 (originally published in Interpretation 25 [1971] 454-79). 11 Hanson, in his article "Apocalypticism" in IDBSup, speaks repeatedly of apocalyptic movements. 12 Note, however, Hanson's later essay, "Rebellion in Heaven, Azazel and Euhemeristic Heroes in 1 Enoch 6—11 "JBL 96 (1977) 195-233. 13 For example, C. Rowland, The Open Heaven A Study ofApocalyptic injudavrm and Early Christianity (New York: Crossroad, 1982) 13-14. 14 J.J. Collins, "Apocalyptic Eschatology as the Transcendence of Death," in Hanson, ed., Visionaries and Their Apocalypses, 61-84 (originally published in CBQ 37 [1974] 21-43).

The Enoch Movement The publication of the Aramaic fragments of 1 Enoch from Qumran byJ.T. Milik in 1976 has been a turning point in the recent study of apocalypticism. Milik claimed, on the basis of paleography, that a copy of the Astronomical Book (1 Enoch 72-82) dates "from the end of the third or the beginning of the second century," while a manuscript of the Book of the Watchers (1 Enoch 1-36), including fragments of chaps. 112‫־‬, dates from the first half of the second century BCE15 If we assume that these manuscripts were not autographs, both compositions may well date from the third century, appreciably earlier than had previously been thought. Consequently new attention has been focused on the Enochic writings as evidence for apocalypticism prior to Daniel and the Maccabean revolt.16 The early date of several Enochic writings seems assured even apart from the paleography of the Qumran fragments. The Animal Apocalypse (1 Enoch 85-90), which is part of the Book of Dreams (1 Enoch 83-90), clearly alludes to the Maccabean revolt and is roughly contemporary with the Book of Daniel. Yet it seems to presuppose the Book of the Watchers at 1 Enoch 86-87 (the story of the fallen angels). The Apocalypse of Weeks (7 Enoch 93:1-10; 91:11-17) does not refer to the desecration of the Temple by Antiochus Epiphanes and was probably written before it. This apocalypse is now embedded in the Epistle of Enoch (1 Enoch 91-105) and may have always been an integral part of it. The Epistle fits as well in the preMaccabean era as in the Hasmonean period to which it was dated by R.H. Charles, and its polemic against idolatry can be more plausibly assigned to the earlier date. Moreover, the Book ofJubilees, itself of Maccabean origin, seems to refer not only to the Astronomical Book, the Book of the Watchers, and the Book of Dreams but also to the Epistle of Enoch (although this allusion is disputed).17 It appears, then, that we have a corpus of writings in the name of Enoch, composed over roughly the half century before the Mac-

15

J.T. Milik, The Books of Enoch (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1976) 5-7. "‫ י‬See especially M.E. Stone, Scriptures, Sects and Visions (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980) 27-47; reprinted in Hanson, ed., Visionaries and Their Apocalypses, 85100), and J.C. VanderKam, Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic Tradition (CBQMS 16; Washington: Catholic Biblical Association of America, 1984). 17 Jub 4: 16-25. VanderKam, Enoch, 142-49; G.W.E. Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature Betiveen the Bible and the Mishnah (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1981) 149-50. For the date of Jubilees, J.C. VanderKam, Textual and Historical Studies in the Book of Jubilees (HSM 14; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1977) 214-85.

cabean revolt.18 It is reasonable to suppose that the literary continuity is due to the ongoing activity of a group, and there are indications within the books themselves of an emerging group identity. 1 Enoch is introduced as "the words of the blessing of Enoch according to which he blessed the chosen and righteous who must be present on the day of distress." T h e chosen and righteous appear to be technical terms throughout the book for a particular group, which is not simply identical with the Jewish people. (Contrasts between the righteous and the sinners are especially sharp in the Epistle.) The Book of the Watchers and the Astronomical Book, which seem to be the oldest sections of 1 Enoch, give least indication of a distinct group identity. In 1 Enoch 10: 16 "the plant of righteousness and truth" is apparendy Israel, and there is no reference to a further offshoot — on the contrary, "all the sons of men shall be righteous" (/ Enoch 10:21). By contrast, the Apocalypse of Weeks assigns the origin of the plant of righteousness to the third week, in the time of Abraham, but has another development at the end of the seventh week. Then "the chosen righteous from the eternal plant of righteousness" will be chosen. 19 This special group is evidendy an offshoot from Israel. The Animal Apocalypse also recounts the rise of a special group in 1 Enoch 90:6: "and small lambs were born from those white sheep, and they began to open their eyes and see." Modern scholarship has often associated this development with the rise of Hasidim, who, like the lambs, take up arms and make common cause with Judas Maccabee. 20 The Apocalypse of Weeks also endorses the use of the sword against the wicked and is compatible with what we know of the Hasidim. The apocalyptic movement underlying the early Enoch literature appears to have become more sharply defined in the crisis under Antiochus Epiphanes, but it must have originated some considerable time before that. The "symbolic universe" 21 of the movement, also, 18 T h e Similitudes of Enoch (1 Enoch 37—71) are a later development, although they are Jewish and no later than the first century CE See D.W. Suter, "Weighed in the Balance: The Similitudes of Enoch in Recent Discussion," RelSRev 7 (1981) 217-

21. 19

O n the terminology, see F. Dexinger, Henochs Zehnwochenapokalypse und offene Probleme der Apokalyptikforschung (Leiden: Brill, 1977) 164-77. 20 1 Macc 2:42; 1 Macc 7:12-13; 2 Macc 14:6. See especially M. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1974) 1.179. See the comments of G.W.E. Nickelsburg, "Social Aspects of Palestinian Jewish Apocalypticism,' ‫ י‬in D. Hellholm, ed.; Apocalypticism_in the Mediterranean World and the Near East (Tübingen: M o h r / Siebeck, 1983) 641-54. Related developments are attested m Jubilees 23 and C D 1. 21 Hanson ("Apocalypticism," 30) defines apocalypticism as "the symbolic universe in which an apocalyptic movement codifies its identity and interpretation of reality."

may have undergone some adjustments at that point, but the main outlines of the Enochic system may be found already in the Book of the Watchers and the Astronomical Book, which may be as old as the third century. Our knowledge of the history of this early Enoch movement is very sketchy, but some points have been clarified by recent study.22 A Mesopotamian Context The figure of Enoch is fashioned after Mesopotamian prototypes, especially Enmeduranki, who appears as seventh king in several antediluvian lists.23 This association is already evident in the Ρ source in Gen 5:21-24, where Enoch is placed seventh from creation. 24 The age of Enoch, 365 years, suggests an association with the solar year. Enmeduranki was associated with the sun-god Shamash. It is less certain whether the biblical phrase wayyithallek 'et-ha'elohtm, usually translated "he walked with God," reflects the tradition that Enmeduranki was admitted to the divine assembly and implies the later tradition that Enoch sojourned with the angels.25 Even if the use of the article with 'elohim reflects a polytheistic source, it is possible that his walking was still on earth. 2fi The motif of Enoch's final translation is derived from the Babylonian flood hero Utnapishtim. 27 The general context of these associations is clear enough. The Jewish writer constructs Enoch as a counterpart to legendary Mesopotamian heroes, no less than they in fame and distinction. This kind of competition between traditions is quite old and is reflected, for example, in the biblical appropriation of the flood story. It becomes much more blatant in the Hellenistic period, when Ps. Eupolemus attributes the discovery of astrology to Enoch and Artapanus credits Moses with inventing the Egyptian animal cults.28 22

VanderKam (Enoch) hasprovided the most complete discussion to date. Ibid., chaps. 1 and 2. The association with Enmeduranki was proposed by H. Zimmern in 1903 and has been widely accepted. 24 In the J source (Gen 4: 17), Enoch is son of Cain, grandson of Adam. 25 So VanderKam, Enoch, 44. For the texts about Enmeduranki, see W.G. Lambert, "Enmeduranki and Related Matters," JCS 21 (1967) 126-38. 26 T h e same phrase is used in connection with Noah in Gen 6:9. Cf. similar expressions for a relationship with God in Mai 2:6 and Mic 6:8. 2 ' ANET, 95. Note also the suggestion of R. Borger ("Die Bcschwörungsserie BIT MESERI und die Himmelfahrt Hcnochs," JMS 33 [1974] 183-96), who relates Enoch to Utuabzu, seventh sage and counselor of Enmeduranki, who ascended to heaven. 28 See J J . Collins, Behveen Athens and Jerusalem.Jewùh Identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora (New York: Crossroad, 1983) 32-39, and, more broadly, M. Braun, History and Romance in Graeco-Oriental Literature (Oxford: Blackwell, 1938). 23

The Priestly portrait of Enoch in Genesis stops far short of the legend developed in 1 Enoch. Enoch is not said to transmit revelations or to write books, and he is not contemporaneous with the fallen angels. Whatever association with the heavenly world is implied, it does not yet have the revelatory function that is crucial to 1 Enoch. Enoch , s role as revealer is, however, illuminated by the parallel with Enmeduranki. The Sumerian king was admitted into the divine assembly and shown mysteries that included the tablets of heaven and the techniques of divination. Enoch reveals "that which appeared to me in the heavenly vision and which I know from the words of the holy angels and understand from the tablets of heaven" (/ Enoch 93:2). Enmeduranki was regarded as the founder of the bārû guild of diviners and the mediating revealer of its methods. Enoch, the " scribe of righteousness" (/ Enoch 12:4), is the prototype of the "righteous and chosen" and is cast as their mediator of revelation. T h e analogy with Enmeduranki suggests that the Enoch movement was in some sense a Jewish counterpart to the Mesopotamian diviners. On the evidence of the literature, however, the influence of divination was stricdy limited. 29 Enoch does not employ the techniques of the bārû—consulting entrails, observing oil on water, or manipulating the cedar rod. T h e only Babylonian medium of revelation that he endorses is the dream, which had some precedent in biblical tradition (cf. Jacob and Joseph), although it had also been subject to criticism.30 Interestingly, dream interpretation was not especially characteristic of the bārû guild.31 The Enochic interest in the astral world may have been stimulated by the science of the astrologers, but Enoch does not use the stars for divination. The relation of the Enoch movement to the Babylonian diviners may be clarified by consideration of two biblical parallels. Second Isaiah vehemently ridicules the diviners and wise men of Babylon and contrasts them with the servant of the Lord (Isa 44:25-26; 47:13). Yet his demonstrations of Yahweh's superiority are colored by this polemic. He places exceptional emphasis on the claim that his God has foretold things from of old. T h e ability to predict is 29 VanderKam, who has argued at length for the relevance of divination as a background for apocalypticism, notes that the two "certainly have not produced comparable literature" (Enoch, 62). 30 O n dreams in the biblical tradition, see E.L. Ehrlich, Da Traum in Alten Testament (Berlin: Töpelmann, 1953). Note the negative evaluations of dreams in Deut 13: 1-3; J e r 23:25-28; 29:8; Sir 34: 1-8. 31 VanderKam, Enoch, 61.

accepted as a criterion of divine power. The prophet is not a diviner, but he claims to outdo them at their primary task.32 The court legends in Daniel 1-6 also have a Babylonian setting. Here Daniel is trained as a Babylonian wise man and, at least in Daniel 2, appears to be a member of a guild.33 He too outdoes the Chaldeans at their own task of interpreting dreams and mysterious writing, but he does so by the power of the God of Israel. Daniel, like Enoch, endorses the dream as a medium of revelation but does not resort to the divinatory techniques of the bārû. In each of these cases, the Jewish prophet or wise man is in competition with his Babylonian counterparts and accepts some of their presuppositions but also maintains a distinctive identity. The competitive aspect is not so explicit in the case of Enoch but is implied by the comparison with Enmeduranki. The analogy with Daniel is especially interesting for the present discussion. It is well known that the tales in Daniel 1-6 represent a preapocalyptic stage of the Daniel tradition, which is primarily concerned with problems of Jewish identity in the eastern Diaspora. 34 It seems that the Enoch tradition had its roots in a similar context. What is especially important is that the interest in the revelation of mysteries that is fundamental to apocalypticism 35 is introduced in both traditions in this context — in Daniel's role as dream interpreter and Enoch's ascent to heaven. Both go well beyond Second Isaiah and come closer to Babylonian models in the manner in which revelation is received. T o be sure, both traditions undergo some development, both in the manner of revelation and in the area of eschatology, before we can speak of apocalypses, and the development involves some reappropriation of Israelite traditions. Yet the understanding of revelation as the interpretation of mysteries, especially through dreams, which was developed in the Babylonian setting, remained an important constituent of the apocalyptic world view.36 32

See P. von der Osten-Sackcn, Die Apokalyptik in ihrem Verhältnis zu Prophetie und Weisheit (Theologische Existenz heute 157; Munich: Kaiser, 1969) 18-23. 33 J.J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Daniel (HSM 16; Missoula, Mont.: Scholars Press, 1977) 27-36. 34 W.L. Humphreys, "A Life-Style for the Diaspora: A Study of the Tales of Esther and Daniel," JBL 92 (1973) 211-23; J J. Collins. "The Court-Tales in Daniel and the Development of Apocalyptic,"JBL 94 (1975) 218-34. 35 This has been repeatedly emphasized in recent years. See the definition of apocalypse in Semeia 14(1979) 9; Rowland, The Open Heaven, 13-14; J. Carmignac, "Qu'est-ce que l'apocalyptique? Son emploi à Qumrân," RevQ 10(1979) 3-33; H. Stegemann, "Die Bedeutung der Qumranfunde für die Erforschung der Apokalyptik," in Hellholm, ed., Apocalypticism, 495-530. See the formulation of VanderKam (Enoch, 62), who argues that a common structure of revelation through enigmatic signs distinguishes both Meso-

The differences between the Daniel and Enoch traditions should also be noted. Daniel is a practitioner of courdy wisdom, concerned with the rise and fall of kingdoms. The earliest Enoch tradition is characterized by pseudoscientific speculation on cosmology and astronomy. These interests derive from the ascent of Enoch and his connection with the solar calendar. 37 The distinctive interests suggest that each tradition originally had a different Sitz im Leben and explain some of the differences between the apocalyptic movements that developed. 38 The Daniel tradition first takes on a clearly apocalyptic character during the crisis of the Maccabean era. It is now apparent that Enochic apocalypticism had taken shape before then. The "symbolic universe" of this movement is most fully described in the Book of the Watchers, which contains the oldest extant account of Enoch's ascent, as distinct from his final translation. 39 The Symbolic Universe of Enoch The report of Enoch's äscent is embedded in the Book of the Watchers, 1 Enoch 12—16. This passage occupies a pivotal place in the book. The myth of the Watchers in 1 Enoch 6—11 makes no mention of potamian divination and Jewish apocalypticism from biblical prophecy. Compare J J . Collins, "Jewish Apocalyptic Against Its Hellenistic Near Eastern Environment," BASOR 220 [1975] 27-36), where I emphasize revelation by interpretation as a widespread characteristic of the Hellenistic age (cf. also The Apocalyptic Vision, 67-93). J . Carmignac ("Description du phénomène de l'apocalyptique dans l'Ancien Testament," in Hellholm, ed., Apocalypticism, 163-70) argues that dreams are at the origin of apocalypticism, without regard to extrabiblical material. ' ‫ ד‬The antiquity of this material is supported by the fact that the Astronomical Book does not reflect a dispute between solar and lunar calendars, as does Jubilees in the Maccabean era. Instead, it polemicizes against a 360-day calendar which was never official in Judaism and has its closest parallels in Babylonia. See VanderKam, Enoch, 91-104. The primitive character of Enoch's astronomy is emphasized by O. Neugebauer, The "Astronomical" Chapters of the Ethiopie Book of Enoch (72—82) (Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1981). 3 " Compare the argument of R.R. Wilson, "From Prophecy to Apocalyptic: Reflections on the Shape of Israelite Religion," Semeia 21 (1981) 93, that "the shape of a particular group's religion and literature will depend on the group's social and religious background." " The oldest fragments ascribed to the Astronomical Book by Milik do not overlap at all with the Ethiopie text, although they do overlap with another Qumran fragment of the Astronomical Book. The pre-Maccabean Astronomical Book seems to have been quite different from the text that survived. The original form cannot be reconstructed simply by excising supposed additions from the Ethiopie text. The book as we have it does not describe Enoch's ascent, but clearly presupposes a heavenly tour (cf 76: 1). The clearest reference is in 81 :5, where three angels set Enoch down in front of his house. Since these have not been mentioned !before, they are thought to be derived from the Animal Apocalypse (cf 87:3). The tour framework then may be part of a secondary recension of the Astronomical Book.

Enoch and is widely thought to be woven from two older traditions.40 Chapters 12-16, where Enoch is introduced for the first time, has aptly been called "a kind of commentary" on that myth. 41 It pronounces a verdict on the Watchers of the preceding chapters and highlights some aspects of their sin: they abandoned heaven and became unclean with human women, and they spread a worthless mystery on earth. On the other hand, this passage prepares us for the "true" revelation, which will be furnished in the journeys of Enoch in 1 Enoch 17-36. This revelation is also directly related to the story of the Watchers. While the various segments of the Book of the Watchers may have had diverse origins, they are now related to each other in a coherent apocalypse.42 In view of Enoch's other associations with Enmeduranki, we must assume that the idea of his ascent for revelatory purposes was suggested, at least in part, by that king's admission to the divine assembly. The actual account in 1 Enoch 14 however, does not even mention the heavenly tablets that are noted in 1 Enoch 81:1 and 93:2. Instead, it is shaped in large part by the tradition of prophetic throne visions, reaching back to Micaiah ben Imlah (1 Kings 22) and Isaiah 6.43 Prophetic influence is conspicuous in the climax of the vision, where Enoch is given a mission to rebuke the Watchers. There are also several noteworthy departures from the prophetic tradition. The whole experience is set in a dream, a "mantic" medium but one that had ancient Israelite precedents. It should be noted, however, that dreams of journeys to heaven or the netherworld are not recorded in the Hebrew Bible but are attested in Mesopotamia. 44 The actual upward travel of Enoch is recorded. The vision of the heavenly mansion is far more complex than what we find in the prophets and has affinities with later, mystical,

40 Hanson, "Rebellion in Heaven," 197, and, in more detail, G.W.E. Nickelsburg, "Apocalyptic and Myth in 1 Enoch 6—11," JBL 96 (1977) 384-86, and D. Dimant, "1 Enoch 6—11: A Methodological Perspective," SBLASP (1978) 1:323-39. 41 G.W.E. Nickelsburg, "Enoch, Levi and Peter: Recipients of Revelation in Upper Galilee," JBL 100 (1981) 575. 42 J J . Collins, "The Apocalyptic Technique: Setting and Function in the Book of the Watchers," CBQ.44 (1982) 91-111; J.C. Thorn, "Aspects of the Form, Meaning and Function of the Book of the Watchers," Neotestamentica 17 (1983) 40-48. 43 I. Gruenwald, Apocalyptic and Merkcwah Mysticism (Leiden: Brill, 1980) 21-42: Rowland. The Open Heaven. 78-80. 44 A.L. Oppenheim, The Interpretation of Dreams in the Ancient Near Elast (Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1956) 214. Note especially the "Vision of the Nether World" attributed to an Assyrian prince in a tablet from the seventh century (ANET, 109-10), and see further H. Kvanvig. Roots of Apocalyptic (WMANT 61; Ncukirchcn-Vluyn: Ncukirchcncr Verlag, 1988).

literature. 45 It would seem to presuppose already some tradition of mystical speculation. Most significandy, Enoch is implicitly cast as a revealer of mysteries. The Watchers are angels who descend to reveal a worthless mystery. Enoch is a human being who ascends to get the true revelation. 46 T h e sin of the Watchers is specified in 1 Enoch 12-16 as improper marriage and improper revelation. Both of these factors are prominent in 1 Enoch 6— 11, where they lead to the spread of violence on earth. By analogy with other apocalyptic writings, it is very probable that the myth is used paradigmatically to describe the author's own time, although we cannot demand an exact correlation of all details. There is a growing consensus that the editorial section in 1 Enoch 12— 16 implies a critique of the Jerusalem priesthood (see esp. 1 Enoch 15:2: "You ought to petition on behalf of men, not men on behalf of you").47 T h e description of Enoch as a "scribe of righteousness" suggests that the author and his circle may have been scribes too. T h e application of the myth can hardly be restricted to the priesthood, however. It surely entails a more general description of a world gone awry. In view of the analogies with Greek myths, especially that of Prometheus, 48 the general situation is most probably the spread of Hellenistic culture in the third century. The myth would seem to imply that superhuman forces are at work, but human responsibility is not necessarily excluded thereby. Rather, the paradigm of the Watchers underlines the responsibility of sinners and their liability to punishment. 49 Enoch's own revelation is derived from his tour, which begins in 1 Enoch 17 and takes him to the ends of the earth, accompanied by angelic guides.50 It is evident that the author draws on a learned tradition of cosmology and mythical geography. It is inappropriate, however, to ask whether "scientific" or eschatological interests 45

So esp. Gruenwald, Apocalyptic and Merkavah Mysticism. While Enoch is given the privilege of entering to the divine presence that is denied to some angels, VanderKam's statement that he "attains at least the status of an angel" (Enoch, 131) does not seem to be justified in the Book of the Watchers. Such a definitive exaltation is attested, however, in the later tradition: 1 Enoch 71 ;2 Enoch 22, and the so-called 3 Enoch 4. 47 D.W. Suter, "Fallen Angel, Fallen Priest: The Problem of Family Purity in 1 Enoch 6—16, HUCA 50 (1979) 115-35; Nickelsburg, "Enoch, Levi and Peter," 586. 48 Nickelsburg, "Apocalyptic and Myth/' 383-405. Nickelsburg sees an allusion to the wars of the Diadochi in 1 Enoch 6 — 11. 49 1 Enoch 98:4 counters the deterministic implications of the story of the Watchers by insisting that "sin was not sent on the earth but man of himself created it." 50 M. Himmelfarb (TOUTS of Hell: An Apocalyptic Form in Jewish and Christian Literature [Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1983] 50-60) comments on the form of the tour and points to analogies in Ezekiel 40-48 and in ancient dream interpretation. These analogies do not account for the range of the content. 46

predominate in this composition. The pseudoscientific lore is placed at the service of eschatology. Enoch's first tour in chaps. 17-19 culminates with the prison for the stars of heaven. The second tour begins in chap. 20 again with the place of punishment of the stars and proceeds to the abodes of the dead in chap. 22. Subsequently, Enoch sees the fire of all the lights of heaven, the place where God will set his throne in the end time and the place of judgment for sinners (chaps. 23-27). 5 ' The remainder of the tour, to the ends of the earth, serves to fill in the cosmological context of the places of judgment and reaffirm the order of the universe, which had been eclipsed by the revolt of the Watchers. 52 Enoch's tour cannot be adequately explained either as a midrash on "walking with the angels" or by the precedent of Enmeduranki. While there are many partial parallels, it does not seem that this tour was based on a clear model. 53 Rather, it expresses the new symbolic universe of one Jewish movement in the Hellenistic age. The orderly world traversed by Enoch stands in sharp contrast to the anomie of the story of the Watchers and presumably reflects the disparity between the author's faith in a divinely controlled universe and the actual historical experience of the time. The symbolic universe of Enoch is expressed in mythological terms although it embraces pseudoscientific cosmology. Two aspects are especially important. First, there is a transcendent world, which is not accessible to humanity without special revelation. 54 It includes the heavenly council of God and his angelic hosts. It also includes an elaborate cosmology that is undisturbed by the disruptions of the Watchers. Second, there is the assurance of a definitive judgment. This is not only foretold. It is built into the cosmology in the places of judgment. This judgment will deal not only with the fate of the earth but also with the fate of individuals beyond death. Both these aspects serve to restore the sense of order and justice disrupted by the Watchers. 51

Stone (Scriptures, Seek and Virions, 34-35) acknowledges "some eschatological interest, particularly in chapters 1 - 6 and 10:14-16" but passes over the eschatological significance of Enoch's tour. 52 VanderKam's statement that the order of the universe is presupposed and unchanging in the Book of the Watchers (Enoch, 7 n. 24) does not appear to take the descent of the Watchers into account. 53 See VanderKam, Enoch, 137-8. The parallels that have been adduced include the travels of Gilgamesh and the Odyssey, especially book 11. 54 It is often observed that many of the places observed by Enoch are actually located on earth (e.g., Rowland, The Open Heaven 124-26). His experience is transcendent, however, in the sense that it goes beyond the normal range of human experience.

The Astronomical Book has a similar mythological framework. It is presented as an angelic revelation mediated by Uriel, the guide of all the heavenly bodies. Several angelic leaders of the stars are named, especially in 1 Enoch 82.55 The eschatological horizon is shown in the allusion to "the new creation which will last forever" in 1 Enoch 72:1 and the upheavals "in the days of the sinners when many heads of the stars will go astray" (/ Enoch 80).56 Reward after death is implied at 1 Enoch 81:4. T h e predominant interest of the Astronomical Book is in calendrical and cosmological matters, but they are presented in the context of an apocalyptic view of the world. The cosmological interest recedes in the "historical" Enoch apocalypses, the Animal Apocalypse and the Apocalypse of Weeks. These works represent a new stage in the Enoch movement, marked by a more sharply defined group identity and the appropriation of new literary forms. Their novelty over against the Book of the Watchers should not be underestimated. Here we can only note some points of continuity. T h e periodization of history is already adumbrated, though certainly not developed, in / Enoch 10:12, where the Watchers are bound for seventy generations. Both "historical" apocalypses provide for a final judgment that involves the destruction of the Watchers. T h e Animal Apocalypse is allegorical throughout and attaches great importance to angelic activity, notably the seventy angelic "shepherds" of the nations. Yet it evidently endorses the human initiative of Judas Maccabee (the horned ram in 1 Enoch 90:9). The Epistle (1 Enoch 91 —105) speaks more directly in terms of human causality, but angels figure prominently in the judgment and the life beyond death (1 Enoch 102—104). It appears then that the Enoch movement has its own distinctive history, which has little relation to the eschatological conventicles posited by Plöger. Rather, it originated in the confrontation with Mesopotamian culture in the eastern Diaspora 57 and its "scientific" interests developed in that setting. The subsequent development of 55 VanderKam's statement that the Astronomical Book "does not disclose a transcendent reality beyond the perceivable universe" (Enoch, 109) is odd, since he recognizes the pervasive role of tne angels (103 n. 84). 56 VanderKam (Enoch, 106-7) argues that chaps. 80 and 81 are secondary additions. The allusion to Enoch's return to earth at 81: 5 seems to presuppose the Animal Apocalypse (87: 3), but this may be part of a broader revision rather than simply an addition. The objection to chap. 80 is that the disruption of the stars allegedly contradicts 72: 1, which says that their regulations will last until the new creation. Whether there is a real contradiction here is questionable. The regulations may still be in force if some stars digress, or the events described in chap. 80 may be part of the transition to the new creation. 57 This is not to say that any of the extant Enoch books were necessarily written in Babylonia. It is generally agreed that at least the Book of Dreams and Epistle were

an eschatologically oriented apocalyptic movement seems to have been prompted by the culture crisis of the Hellenistic age, well in advance of the Antiochan persecution. The "symbolic universe" constructed in the Book of the Watchers draws on many traditions, including biblical prophecy, but also retains the imprint of a tradition of pseudoscientific learning. Relation to Biblical Tradition The question of continuity with the biblical tradition does not admit of a simple answer, not only because of the diversity of Enoch's sources but also because of the diversity within the older Israelite religion. The biblical canon is shaped to a great degree by Deuteronomic influence. In Deut 30: 12 we are assured that God's commandment "is not in heaven, that you should say, 'Who will go up for us to heaven, and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?'" The whole premise of Enochic revelation is thereby undermined. A similar perspective is found in the wisdom literature in the rhetorical question of Agur: "Who has ascended to heaven and come down?" (Prov 30:1-4). There is no reason to suppose that the Enoch group rejected the Mosaic law, but it was not sufficient for them; hence the need for the higher angelic revelation. The heavenly revelations cannot be understood as an explanatory midrash on the Torah. They give new information, things that Enoch alone is supposed to have seen (/ Enoch 19:3). It is significant that these revelations are ascribed to a figure far older than Moses, older even than the Israelite people. I Enoch is very sharply in contrast with Deuteronomic religion.58 There were other strands of Israelite religion, however, that allowed

written in Palestine. The provenance of the Book of the Watchers is quite uncertain. The book draws on various traditions besides Babylonian ones. Milik thinks the author "was perhaps himself a Jcmsalemite, for he has an excellent knowledge of the environs of the Holy City (26:2-27: 1)" {The Booh of Enoch, 26). Nickclsburg has a stronger case for Galilean origin because of the peculiar prominence of the region around Dan and Mt. Hermon in the story of the Watchers ("Enoch, Levi and Peter," 586-87) but even here the geographical location may have been attached to one of the sources of the Book of the Watchers. ss The covenantal allusions noted by L. Hartman in 1 Enoch 1 — 5 (Asking for a Meaning: A Study of 1 Enoch 1—5 [Lund: Gleerup, 1979]) are placed in a new context of cosmic rather than Deuteronomic law. Consequently it seems misleading to describe Enoch's "pattern of religion" as "covenantal nomism" (as docs E.P. Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism [Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977]). See the discussion of law in / Enoch in C. Münchow, Ethik und Eschatologie. Ein Beitrag zum Verständnis derfrühjüdischenApokalyptik (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1981) 16-42.

more room for mythological speculation. 59 The angelic world which enjoys such prominence in 1 Enoch is a direct development of the heavenly council and host that are widely attested in the Hebrew Bible.60 The throne vision in 1 Enoch 14, with its entourage of holy ones, stands in the tradition of the prophetic visions of Micaiah ben Imlah and Isaiah. Cosmic eschatology also has strong Israelite roots, as Hanson and others have argued. An intriguing passage in Isa 24:21 -23 says that "on that day the Lord will punish the host of heaven, in heaven, and the kings of the earth, on the earth....They will be shut up in a prison, and after many days they will be punished." In its context, this passage is related to the reign of the Lord of hosts on Zion. It evidendy presupposes a mythical story that is not explicit in the text and raises the possibility that Enoch's concept of the prison for the host of heaven is derived from a tradition that was at home in the Jerusalem cult. Other allusions to the punishment of heavenly beings are found in Psalms 82 and 58. The idea that Yahweh will judge the nations and the world is widely attested in the psalms and the prophets (e.g., Psalms 96; 98; Isa 2:4). Even in the light of the mythical traditions associated especially with the Jerusalem cult, there is much that is new in Enoch, much of which may be attributed to the distinctive character of the Enoch tradition. No biblical prophet enjoys the same degree of access to the heavenly world. Enoch's revelation is the disclosure of a mystery, which contains extensive information about the heavenly world or about history. It is not simply the proclamation of God's plan. The range of cosmological speculation is greatly enlarged. The angels are now given names and are the focus of much greater attention than was the case in the Hebrew Bible. We may note here the rabbinic tradition that the names of the angels were brought back from Babylon. 61 Two other points are of more far-reaching importance. First, the hope for judgment after death radically alters the biblical view of salvation. The language of resurrection is used a number of times in 59

See the suggestive article of M. Barker, " Some Reflections Upon the Enoch Myth,"J507"15 (1980) 7-29, although she greatly exaggerates the importance of the fallen angels in the Enochic corpus. See also Stone, Scriptures, Sects and Visions, 30. 60 F.M. Cross, "The Council of Yahweh in Second Isaiah," JNES 12 (1953) 27477; P.D. Miller, The Divine Warrior in Early Israel (HSM 5; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973) 66-74; E.T. Mullen, Jr., The Assembly of the Gods: The Divine Council in Canaanite and Early Hebrew Literature (HSM 24; Chico, Calif: Scholars Press, 1980). 61 Bereshit Rabba, at Gen 18:1. H. Bietenhard, Du himmlische Welt im Urchristentum und Spätjudentum (Tübingen: Mohr [Siebeck], 1951) 12.

the Hebrew Bible for the restoration of the Jewish people— for example, Ezekiel 37 and Isa 26: 19.62 The discussion in 1 Enoch 22, however, is presented in the context of mythical geography and is indebted both to Babylonian and to Greek traditions. 63 The motif of awakening from sleep used in 1 Enoch 91:10 echoes Isa 26:19, but the extended discussion in / Enoch 102 — 104 speaks in terms of the elevation of the righteous to the stars and to the host of heaven 64 We cannot now be sure of the circumstances in which the belief in the afterlife began to play a role in the Enoch tradition. In view of the cosmological context in the Book of the Watchers, and the association with the angels in the Epistle, we must suspect that reflection on the translation of Enoch himself played a part in this development. Personal afterlife is not, of course, the only aspect of apocalyptic eschatology. 1 Enoch also looks for the end of this world and a new creation in which the earth will be transformed, ideas more in accordance with prophetic eschatology. Yet the hope for a blessed afterlife, especially in the angelic form that is explicit in 1 Enoch 104 has great implications for apocalyptic piety and goes hand in hand with the tendency to mysticism evident in Enoch's association with the angels and in his throne vision.65 Second, the claim of a special exclusive revelation often entails a tendency to sectarianism. 66 1 Enoch presents an elaborate view of the world based on Enoch's alleged experience. The movement that accepts Enoch as its authority is likely to be at variance with those who do not. It is difficult to assess how far the Enoch movement was estranged from the rest of Jewish society at the various stages of its history. If we can assume that the lunar calendar of rabbinic Judaism was already in force in the third century, the 364-day calendar of the Astronomical Book would have been an obstacle to fi2

Isa 26: 19 is sometimes taken as a reference to the resurrection of individuals (e.g., L.J. Greenspoon, "The Origin of the Idea of Resurrection," in B. Halpcrn and J.D. Levcnson, ed., Traditions in Transformation [Winona Lake, In.: Eisenbrauns, 1981] 284-86), but the context is clearly concerned with the wellbeing of the nation rather than of individuals. 6 ‫ י‬Sec the thorough study by M.-T. Wacker, Weltordnung und Gericht. Studien zu I Henoch 22 (Wurzburg: Echter, 1982). Babylonian influence is apparent in the location of the underworld inside a mountain, Greek influence in the differentiation of groups after death. 64 See especially G.W.E. Nickelsburg, Resurrection, Immortality and Eternal Life in Intertestamental Judaism (Harvard Theological Studies 26; Cambridge: Harvard Univcrsity Press, 1972) 112-29. 65 On apocalyptic piety, see J.C.H. Lcbram, "The Piety of the Jewish Apocalyptists," in Hellnolm, ed., Apocalypticism, 171-210. 6 ‫ יי‬This is not necessarily always the case. 2 Baruch uses the claim of special revelation to buttress the authority of the Mosaic law.

participation in the cult.67 However, we are poorly informed about the history of the calendar, and the Enoch group may not have been located in proximity to the Temple in any case. A few passages reflect a negative attitude to the Second Temple or to the priesthood. 68 Yet the Animal Apocalypse seems to mourn the death of Onias III (/ Enoch 90:8) and make common cause with Judas Maccabee. T h e message of the Epistle is intended broadly for the "sons of earth" (/ Enoch 105:1-2). If the Animal Apocalypse and the Apocalypse of Weeks are correctly associated with the Hasidim, this would imply active participation in the events of the Maccabean era. It is noteworthy, however, that the books of Enoch were treasured in the Qumran community, which eventually made a cleaner break with Jewish society.69 Daniel and Enoch The apocalyptic visions of Daniel seem prima fade to stand in clearer continuity with biblical prophecy. Two recent studies have independendy traced the development of the symbolic vision form from Amos to the apocalypses.70 Yet the development is also significandy modified by the form of the dream report, as we might expect in the light of Daniel 1 - 6 . Dream reports throughout the ancient Near East are characteristically presented within a conventionalized frame that tells about the dreamer, the locality, and the circumstances and often reports his reaction at the end.71 This frame is an important formal element in the visions of Daniel. Daniel lacks the cosmological interests of Enoch (which recede even in the "historical" Enochic apocalypses of the Maccabean era). Yet the symbolic universe of Daniel is closer to that of Enoch than to 67 T h e history of the calendar is in dispute. See J . C . VanderKam, "The Origin, Character and Early History of the 364-Day Calendar: A Reassessment o f j a u b e r t ' s Hypotheses," CBQ, 41 (1979) 390-411; P.R. Davies, "Calendrical Change and Q u m r a n Origins: An Assessment of VanderKam's Theory," CßQ.45 (1983) 80-89; and VanderKam, " T h e 364-Day Calendar in the Enochic Literature," SBLASP (1983) 157-65. 68 We have noted that a critique of the priesthood may be implied in the Book of the Watchers. T h e Apocalypse of Weeks dismisses the entire postexilic period as "an apostate generation" and ignores the restoration of the Persian era. T h e Animal Apocalypse says that the offerings of the Second Temple were impure. 69 O n the affinities of the Enoch literature with the Q u m r a n sect, see especially G.W.E. Nickelsburg, " T h e Episde of Enoch and the Q u m r a n D t e r a t u r e / ' T O 33 (1982) 333-48. 70 S. Niditch, The Symbolic Vision in Biblical Tradition (HSM 30: Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1983); K. Koch, "Vom profetischen zum apokalyptischen Visionsbericht," in Hellholm, ed., Apocalypticism, 413-46. 71 Oppenheim, The Interpretation of Dreams, 187.

its biblical precedents. 72 The heavenly host is more active here than in any other biblical book.73 The patron angels of the nations are the forces behind history in Daniel 10, as in the Animal Apocalypse, and the victory of Michael in Dan 12:1 is evidently of crucial importance for the Jews on earth. 74 The vision of the divine throne in Daniel 7 is remarkably similar to that of 1 Enoch 14, and the analogy strongly supports the view that the "holy ones" in Daniel are heavenly beinge.75 The resurrection in Daniel 12, where the wise teachers will shine like stars, directly parallels the formulation of 1 Enoch 104:2. Further parallels can be drawn between the periodization of history as seventy weeks of years in Daniel 9, the seventy shepherds in the Animal Apocalypse, and the schema of weeks in the Apocalypse of Weeks. Daniel also attests the rise of a distinct group, the maskîlîm, who act in the time of persecution by instructing the masses. The instruction they give is presumably the view of the world disclosed in Daniel's visions. Here again, the claim to a higher revelation involves a sectarian tendency, although the maskîlîm are actively engaged with the rest of Jewish society. The stance of the Danielic group is rather different from the militant posture of the righteous in 1 Enoch and does not correspond to what we are told of the Hasidim in the books of Maccabees. 76 The various apocalyptic groups of the Maccabean era can be classified together only if Hasidim is used as a very broad umbrella term. It is noteworthy, however, that both the Danielic and the Enochic writings were preserved at Qumran. In Daniel as in Enoch, we find a movement that has its own historical roots, quite distinct from earlier prophetic groups. In the stress of the Antiochan persecution, it formulated an apocalyptic symbolic universe that owed much to ancient myth. 77 The fact that 72 Sec my remarks in "Apocalyptic Genre and Mythic Allusions in Daniel," JSOT 21 (1981) 83-100. 73 The extraordinary claim of W.S. Towner [Daniel [Interpretation; Atlanta: Knox, 1984] 173) that "a de-mythologizing of angels and the heavenly forces has already taken place in the Danielic corpus" cannot be defended historically. 74 His importance is all the greater if he is identified with the "one like a son of man" in chap. 7. See my arguments in The Apocalyptic Vision, 144-46. Sec also Rowland, The Open Heaven 178-83. 75 Ibid., 123-44. See also A. Lacocque, The Book of Daniel (Mania‫׳‬. Knox, 1979) 130-32. 76 Collins, The Apocalyptic Vision, 201-5. Compare Nickelsburg, "Social Aspects of Palestinian Jewish Apocalypticism," 647-48. 77 Especially in the adaptation of the Canaanite Baal/Yamm myth in chap. 7. See Collins, The Apocalyptic Vision, 96-104 and the essay, "Stirring Up the Great Sea" in this volume. AJ. Ferch (The Son of Alan in Daniel 7 [Berrien Springs, Mich.: Andrews University Press, 1979]) misconstrues the nature of mythic allusions, which inevitably involve a transformation of the mythic source. See my comments in "Apocalyptic Genre and Mythic Allusions," 91-95.

the canonical Daniel draws so heavily on myth has scandalized some pious commentators, but this was in fact a point of continuity with Israelite tradition, especially with the cult traditions of Jerusalem. 78 Again, the innovations are significant. Daniel does not explicitly expect a new creation, and the hope for a "kingdom" (presumably on earth) has strong biblical precedents, but the hope for salvation is changed radically by the belief in the resurrection of the dead. We must emphasize that the increased use of myth does not detract from the seriousness of human actions in history. It does, however, place those actions in a new perspective, where their value cannot be measured by their success in this world. Conclusion Jewish apocalypticism, as we find it in 1 Enoch and Daniel, cannot be adequately described as a child of prophecy any more than it can be adequately attributed to Babylonian influence or any other single source. It was essentially a new creation, designed for the needs of a new age, and one that embraced different movements and traditions. Novelty, of course, is not an obstacle to authenticity. Every stage of Israelite religion is marked by changes, often stimulated by contact with neighboring, pagan religions. Jewish apocalypticism was one of several ways in which Jews of the Hellenistic age attempted to adapt their traditions. Despite their sectarian tendencies, these groups continued to interact with other areas ofJewish society. Even the Essenes, who were extreme in their withdrawal, were still recognized as a Jewish "philosophy" by Josephus. It is increasingly evident that apocalypticism continued to play a part in Judaism long after the rise of Christianity, 79 although it is true that it had a far more central place in the new religion.80

78 This has been shown especially by Hanson, "Old Testament Apocalyptic Reexamined" and idem, 'Jewish Apocalyptic Against Its Ancient Near Eastern Environment," RB 78 (1971) 31-58. 79 A.J. Saldarini, "Apocalypses and 'Apocalyptic' in Rabbinic Literature and Mysticism," Semeia 14 (1979) 187-205; Gruenwald, Apocalyptic and Merkavah Mysticism; Rowland, The Open Heaven, 271-348. 80 See my essay, "The Apocalyptic Context of Christian Origins," The Bible and Its Traditions, Michigan Quarterly Review 22 (1983) 250-64.

CHAPTER FOUR

J E W I S H APOCALYPTICISM AGAINST ITS HELLENISTIC NEAR EASTERN E N V I R O N M E N T

In 1950 G. Ernest Wright published The Old Testament Against Its Environment, which became one of the most influential Englishlanguage books on biblical theology in the subsequent quarter of a century. 1 The book has been criticized for its excessive emphasis on the preposition "against" — the differences between ancient Israel and its neighbors. 2 Yet it shared the common presupposition of nearly all biblical scholarship in this century, that the Old Testament can only be understood in the light of its Near Eastern context. A comprehension of the surrounding cultures remains a prerequisite to the understanding of the Israelite texts, since the language of the Old Testament, though modified and adapted, was drawn heavily from these cultures. The importance of the Near Eastern background has been axiomarie in the study of early Israel. However, it has received surprisingly little attention in the study of the post-exilic period. In fact, semiticists in general pay little attention to the period after the rise of Persia. Most of the major reviews of Mesopotamian and Canaanite culture dismiss the Hellenistic period in a few paragraphs. 3 Consequently late developments such as Jewish apocalypticism are often explained as intrusive elements of Greek or Persian origin.4 Recendy Paul D. Hanson has protested against the neglect of the Semitic component in Jewish apocalypticism. 5 Updating the work of Gunkel 6 by use of the Ugaritic myths, Hanson argues that apo1

G.E. Wright, The Old Testament Against Its Environment (SBT 1/2; Chicago: Regnery, 1950). See the comments of J . Barr, "Trends and Prospects in Biblical Theology," JTS 25(1974) 267 and B.S. Childs, Biblical Theology in Crisis (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1970) 47-50. 3 E.g. A.L. Oppenheim, Ancient Mesopotamia (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964) 63; H.W.F. Saggs, The Greatness that was Babylon (New York: Hawthorn, 1962) 152-3; S. Moscati, Die Phoniker (Zurich: Kindler, 1966) 65. 4 See the classic work of W. Bousset, Die Religion des Judentums im späthellenistischen Zeitalter (3rd ed.; ed. H. Gressman; Tübingen: Mohr, 1926) 478-84. 5 P.D. Hanson, "Jewish Apocalyptic against its Near Eastern Environment," RB 78(1971) 31-58; "Old Testament Apocalyptic Re-examined," Interpretation 25(1971) 454-79. 6 H. Gunkel, Schöpfung und Chaos (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1895).

calypticism drew heavily on the mythic patterns and motifs of the ancient Near East. This insight is of fundamental importance for understanding the apocalyptic texts and for appreciating their continuity with earlier Near Eastern traditions. We cannot fail to be surprised, however, that in a study of the Near Eastern environment of postexilic apocalypticism Hanson refers to no non-biblical data later than the time of Sennacherib. One is left with the impression that the post-exilic period was the Sheol of ancient civilization where the myths and ideas of an earlier period led a shadowy afterlife, enjoying vitality only in so far as they were reincarnated in Jewish apocalypticism. Yet the period which followed the rise of Persia was one of the most eventful in the entire history of the Near East. In particular the conquests of Alexander had a profound impact on the eastern civilizations. The impact included an unprecedented circulation of ideas among the various peoples, but more significantly the conditions of life in the conquered areas were changed and as a result there was a transformation of attitudes which went far beyond the literary influence of motifs and patterns. We could hardly expect that Judaism, either in its homeland or in the diaspora, was untouched by this upheaval. If we would appreciate Jewish apocalypticism against its contemporary Near Eastern environment we must look beyond the traces of literary influence between particular books to similar phenomena in the various cultures and the common or similar conditions which produced them. In this essay I wish to consider some of the more conspicuous features which Jewish apocalypticism shared with its Hellenistic Near Eastern environment. While occasional examples of literary borrowings can be found, I will be chiefly concerned with the parallel developments in different national traditions, each of which retained its distinctive character. The similarities which we find throughout the Hellenistic Near East are due primarily to the fact that traditions which had much in common to begin with (e.g. the idea of the kingship of the national deity) were subjected to the same new circumstances. In particular the alteration of political conditions by the advent of the Greeks must be considered a root cause of the new developments in the Hellenistic age. The political setting The most obvious result of the conquests of Alexander was the demise of native rule in the various Near Eastern states. Despite the attempts of the Ptolemies and Seleucids to claim the titles and

traditions of previous native rulers, they were still representatives of a foreign, intrusive civilization.7 Of course the loss of national kingships in the ancient Near East was not entirely due to the campaigns of Alexander. The Jewish kingdom had already been destroyed by the Babylonians, the Babylonian by the Persians. Eventually the Ptolemaic and Seleucid kingdoms would fall to the Romans. T h e Jews were not the only Near Eastern people who resisted Hellenistic rule in the Near East. After the battle of Raphia in 217 BC, in which native Egyptians were enrolled in the Ptolemaic army for the first time, there followed a series of native uprisings, of which the most important took place in the reign of Ptolemy V Epiphanes (204-180 BC).8 These were not simply confrontations of Greeks and Egyptians. T o some extent the revolts were encouraged and assisted by Greek mercenaries, while some conservative Egyptian priests sided with the Ptolemies. 9 Yet, as is clear from their propaganda, the rebels often saw the conflict as a nationalistic rebellion against the Greeks. In the Demotic Chronicle, a pesher-like document from the early Ptolemaic period, the focal point of the prophecy reads: It is a man from Heracleopolis who will rule after the Ionians. 'Rejoice, Ο prophet of Harsaphis.' That means: The prophet of Harsaphis rejoices after the Ionians. For a ruler has arisen in Heracleopolis. 10

The prophecy looks with anticipated delight to the day when the Greek rulers will be replaced by a king from a legitimate Egyptian line." Again, the Potter's Oracle looks forward to a "king from the sun" who will be sent by Isis, and the destruction of the city by the 7

See W.W. Tarn, Hellenistic Civilization (3rd ed.; Cleveland: World, 1961) 128-29 on the Seleucids; 205 on the Ptolemies. 8 Tarn, Hellenistic Civilization, 205; C. Préaux, "Politique du race ou politique royale, , ‫ י‬Chronique d'Egypte 11(1936) 111-38; "Esquisse d'une histoire des révolutions égyptiennes sous les Lagides," ibid., 522-52; E. Will, Histoire politique du monde hellenistique II (Nancy: Berger-Levrault, 1967) 32-36. 9 Préaux, "Politique du race," 111-38; S.K. Eddy, The King is Dead (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1961) 300. 10 C.C. McCown, "Hebrew and Egyptian Apocalyptic Literature," HTR 18(1925) 357-411. Heracleopolis was the scene of the mythical battle between Horus and Seth and the crowning of Osiris and Horus. Its claim to bc the seat of sovereignty at least for Upper Egypt is indicated by its Egyptian title "City of the Royal child" and the tide of its High Priest, "King of Upper Egypt." See H. Bonnet, "Herakleopolis," Reallexicon der Aegyptischen Religionsgeschichte (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1952) 286-7. 11 See now, however, J . H . Johnson, "Is the Demotic Chronicle an Anti-Greek Tract?" in H.-J. Thissen and K.-Th. Zauzich, ed., Grammata Demotika (Festschrift E. Lüddeckens; Würzburg: Zauzich, 1984) 107-24, who argues that the objection is not to the foreign origin of the Greek rulers, but to their mis-rule.

sea (Alexandria).12 Here again the hope of the oracle centers on the restoration of the native kingship and the displacement of the Greeks. The role of Isis in the Potter's Oracle, and the mythological associations of Heracleopolis show the fusion of politics and religion typical of the entire ancient Near East. The Seleucids, who ruled over a greater variety of subjects, also encountered a series of revolts, beginning with the rise of the Parthians shortly after 250 bc 13 In the reign of Antiochus III (223187 BC) we find revolts led by Greek generals, Molon in Media and Achaeus in Asia Minor, who, like their counterparts in Egypt, exploited the unrest of the native people. Antiochus III himself was killed in battle with the people of Elam in 187 BC when he was attacking the temple of Bel. According to Diodorus Siculus he accused the temple priests of declaring war on him, so here too there may have been a revolt.14 The role of the temple in Elam draws attention once again to the fusion of religion and politics. This point is further illustrated by an incident in Babylon in 168 BC.15 Several statues of Hellenized gods were made from gold taken from the Esagila treasury and set up in the temple. Certain "thieves" then attacked the temple and stripped the statues. For this olfence they were condemned to death and burnt. We are familiar with the use of the term "thieves" to designate resistance fighters in the writings of Josephus. 16 We may suspect that the "thieves" in question were prompted by religio-nationalistic motives rather than desire for booty. These various incidents provide the broader context in which the Maccabean rebellion must be seen. We might continue the history of Near Eastern resistance through the Roman period to show that the Jewish revolts against Rome similarly did not take place in a 12

For the Potter's Oracle, sec L. Koenen, "Die Prophezeiungen des 'Töpfers'," ζΡΕ 2(1968) 178-209, "The Prophecies of a Potter: A Prophecy of World Renewal Becomes an Apocalypse," in D.H. Samuel, ed., Proceedings of the twelfth International Congress of Papyrology (Toronto: Hakkcrt, 1970) 249-54. Sec further the essay "The Sibyl and the Potter" in this volume. 3

the Roman Empire," Classical Philology 35(1940) 1-21; Will, Histoire politique, 10-20. 14 Diodorus 28.3.1; 29.15.1; cf. Strabo 16.1.18, Justin 32.2; Eddy, The King is Dead, 133. 15 T.G. Pinches, The Old Testament in the Light of the Historical Records and Legendi of Assyria and Babylonia (3rd ed.; London: SPCK, 1908) 480 and 561; A.T. Olmstead, "Intertcstamcntal Studies," JA OS 56(1936) 242-56. 16 M. Hengcl, Die Z^oten (Leiden: Brill, 1961) 25-46. A striking parallel to this incident is recorded in Josephus, Ant 17.6.2-3 (149-63); JW\. 33.2-4 (65154). Shortly before his death Herod had a golden eagle set up over the entry to the temple in Jerusalem. A group of Jews, led by two "doctors of the law" pulled it down and suffered martyrdom as a result.

‫י‬

vacuum, although, like the Maccabean revolt, they certainly had their own distinctive characteristics. 17 We should note that Persia was also part of the Hellenistic Near Eastern scene and contributed to the resistance against Greece and Rome. The oracle of Hystaspes, which may have been associated with the campaigns of Mithridates against Rome in the first century BC, looks to a "king from heaven" as a savior figure and prophesies the subjection of the west by the east.18 T h e Zand-Γ Vohûman Yasn (Bahman Yasht), a late "midrashic" expansion of a lost text of the Avesta, the Vohûman Yasn, contains in its first chapter a schema of four kingdoms of which the first three are Persian and the fourth is ruled by the "divs with dishevelled hair." 19 The first non-Persian kingdom is presumably the one which overthrew the Persians—i.e. the Greeks. 20 Since the fourth kingdom is also the last before the end of the millennium this section of the Zand must date to the Hellenistic era and be interpreted as a Persian antiHellenistic oracle (although it has been updated to refer to much later, Sassanian, kings). There are then examples of national resistance to Hellenistic rule throughout the Near East from Egypt to Persia, although they are admittedly not numerous. Messianism, as the desire for the restoration of native monarchy, was not a peculiarity of the Jews but was a feature of the entire Near East in the Hellenistic period. The ways in which the national aspirations of each state were expressed also had much in common throughout the area. The common element in Near Eastern political aspirations in the Hellenistic age can be seen from the widespread use of the celebrated schema of the four kingdoms. The division of history into a schema of four world kingdoms followed by some form of decisive divine intervention is found in Daniel 2 and 7, in the fourth Sibyl, the Bahman Yasht and a number of Latin texts of which the oldest is 17 H. Fuchs, Der geistige Widerstand gegen Rom in der antiken Welt (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1938) is concerned chiefly with propaganda rather than actual rebellions. On the political oracles of the Hellenistic period, see J.J. Collins, The Sibylline Oracles of Egyptian Judaism (SBLDS 13; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1974) ch. 1 and M. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974) 1. 184-6. 18 H. Windisch, Die Orakel des Hystaspes (Amsterdam: Koninklijke Akademie van Wetenschapen, 1929); J . Hinnells, "The Zoroastrian Doctrine of Salvation in the Roman World," in E.J. Sharpe and J.R. Hinnells, ed., Man and His Salvation (Manehester: Manchester University, (1973) 125-48. 19 B.T. Anklesaria, ^anrf-f Vohûman Yasn (Bombay: Cama Oriental Institute, 1957). See D. Flusser, "The Four Empires in the Fourth Sibyl and in the Book of Daniel," Israel Oriental Studies 2(1972) 166-67. 20 Eddy, The King is Dead, 19, argues that the "dishevelled hair" is a direct reference to Alexander, who is always portrayed on coins with tousled hair by contrast with the neady groomed Persians of the Persepolis reliefs.

a fragment of the chronographer Aemilius Sura, which has been dated between 181 and 171 BC.21 The passage in the Sibyl (Sib Or 4:49-101) combines the four kingdoms with a schema of ten generations. The fourth kingdom, the Macedonian, coincides with the tenth generation. The Romans are not included in the schema. It appears then that this four kingdom passage should also be dated to the Hellenistic period, prior to the rise of Rome. 22 In Sibylline Oracles 4 and the Roman authors the sequence is Assyria, Media, Persia and Macedonia. The inclusion of Media in this sequence points to an eastern origin since Median power never spread to the west. Flusser has argued convincingly that the schema is of Persian origin. 23 For our purpose, the point to note is that the same schematization of history could be adapted by Persians, Jews, Romans, and the people from whom the Romans adapted it.24 In each case the schema is hostile to the Greeks, who always constitute the fourth (last) world-kingdom. All the peoples who used the schema could view history as running a predetermined course, divided into four periods culminating in the destruction of the Greek kingdom by divine intervention, whether in the form of the Roman empire (Aemilius Sura), the kingdom of God (Daniel) or a new millennium (Bahman Yasht). In the case of the four-kingdom schema we find a pattern which was used internationally, and we must assume that it was consciously borrowed by each people in turn. More often the individual nations drew on their own traditions for their propaganda. 25 So we read in Ps. Callisthenes of the Egyptian hope that Nektanebo would return and conquer the Persians.26 The king in the Potter's Oracle will be an Egyptian king sent by Isis. Similarly, the Jews expected a king from the line of David (e.g. Psalms of Solomon 17:3) or drew their images of the kingdom of God from Canaanite or Israelite royal traditions. 27 The Persian oracles were attributed to the legendary Persians Zoroaster and Hystaspes. We have less direct evidence of 21

Swain, "The Theory of the Four Monarchies," 2-5 Flusser. "The Four Empires," 148-53; also J J . Collins, "The Place of the Fourth Sibyl in the Development of the Jewish Sibyllina,"JJ-S 25(1974) 365-80. The Fourth Sibyl in its present form is a Jewish work from the late first century AD 2‫ג‬ Flusser, "The Four Empires," 173. 24 Swain, "The Theory of the Four Monarchies," 4, has argued that it was brought from Asia Minor to Rome after the battle of Magnesia. 25 Sec especially J.Z. Smith, "Native Cults in the Hellenistic Period," History of Religions 11(1971) 236-49. 2, ' See Collins, The Sibylline Oracles, 14. 27 See e.g. J.A. Emerton, "The Origins of the Son of Man Imagery," JTS 9(1958) 225-42. 22

political oracles from Mesopotamia, but there too we find native traditions used for anti-Hellenistic propaganda. The legend of Semiramis preserved by Diodorus seems to have been developed specifically to surpass the exploits of Alexander. 28 Similarly the Babylonian priest Berossus told the story of Nebuchadnezzar in such a way that his hero appeared greater than Alexander, Seleucus and even Heracles. 29 I have suggested elsewhere that Daniel 2 may be an adaptation of a Babylonian oracle in which Nebuchadnezzar was recalled as the head of gold, implying that his reign was a golden age, and the schema of the four metals was used to suggest a decline in history to the nadir of Greek dominion, which, however, would soon be destroyed. 30 The revival of ancient myths T h e interest in native traditions aroused by the opposition to Greek rule provides the context in which we must view the resurgence of ancient myth in Jewish apocalyptic literature, which has been noted by Cross, Hanson and others. The sages and prophets of the Hellenistic Near East looked not only to the great leaders of the past but also to the ancient myths to provide meaningful paradigms for the present, and especially to the myths of kingship and creation. L. Koenen has shown how the Potter's Oracle draws on the structure of Egyptian creation myths and concludes: It is obvious that the savior-king of the prophecies plays the role of Horus. In this role he overwhelms the chaos of Seth, as does every Egyptian king, and he restores equilibrium to Egypt.31

Many of the Potter's predictions correspond closely to the prophecy of Neferty which dates from 1991 BC In Mesopotamia, while we lack evidence of the use of ancient myths in eschatological oracles, it is significant that there was an archaizing tendency and an interest in the myths during this period. 32 All our copies of the ritual for the

28

Diodorus 2.7.3; 20.3.5. See Eddy, The King ts Dead, 122-23. Josephus, AgAp 1.131 -44; F. Jacoby, Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker III C (Leiden: Brill,1958) 389-91, 406-7 (Abydenus); Eddy, The King is Dead, 125. On the phenomenon of rewrit:ng history in the interests of nationalistic propaganda in the Hellenistic age see M. Braun, History and Romance (Oxford: Blackwell, 1938), and B.Z. Wachholder, Eupolemus (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College, 1974) 71-96. 30 J.J. Collins, "The Court-Tales of Daniel and the Development of Apocalyptic," JBL 94(1975) 218-34. 31 Koenen, "The Prophecies of a Potter," 250. 32 Eddy, The King is Dead, 128-31. 29

Akitu festival come from the Seleucid period. It contains provisions for the recital of the Enuma Elish, the great epic of creation. Since both the epic and the Akitu festival are inseparably linked to the Babylonian kingship, their use in the Hellenistic period could have two implications. O n the one hand, the Seleucid monarchs might claim to win legitimacy by practicing the ritual and supporting Babylonian religion.33 On the other hand the continuation of the ancient rituals could serve to keep alive the recollection of a native kingship.34 T h e two attitudes could be held contemporaneously by different groups. The main point for our purpose is that the ancient myths still enjoyed vitality in the Hellenistic period despite the transformed circumstances. Similarly a lament for Uruk, a Sumerian work composed in the third millennium BC, was recopied in the early Hellenistic period, when Babylon had again been overrun by foreigners. 35 The invasion of the Guti, which occasioned the original composition, now became a paradigm for any foreign invasion. 36 We may compare the typological use of the Exodus motif in O T writings such as Deutero-lsaiah. As a final testimony to the revival of ancient myths in the Hellenistic period we may note that Berossus took the trouble to translate Babylonian mythology for his Greek readers. 37 The use of ancient myth does not in itself, of course, make a writing apocalyptic, but as Gunkel and more recently Cross and Hanson have shown, the myths supply an essential ingredient of apocalyptic literature. The renewed interest in the Babylonian myths in the Hellenistic period and the use of Egyptian myth in political prophecy, provide some analogies for the resurgence of ancient myth in Jewish apocalyptic. This resurgence seems to have been a learned phenomenon, rather than a product of folklore as popular ballads might be. At least in Babylon we know that the scribes who copied the ancient texts required a lengthy education to master the mysteries of cuneiform. 38 In both Babylon and Egypt the use of ancient materials associated with cult and royalty suggests the

33

So Tarn, Hellenistic Civilization, 128-29. • Eddy, The King is Dead, 109-10. 35 Pinches, The Old Testament, 477-78. 36 The Hyksos serve a similar function in Egyptian tradition. Cf. Eddy, The King is Dead, 295-96. 37 For the fragments of Berossus see Jacoby, Die Fragmente, III C, 364-97; P. Schnabel, Berossos und die babylonisch-hellenistische Literatur (Leipzig: Teubner, 1923); S. M. Burstein, The Babyloniaca of Berossus (Malibu: Undena, 1978). 38 G.R. Driver, Semitic Writing (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1948) 64-66; R. Meister, "Zur Erlernung des chaldaischen an Hofe Nebukadnczzars," Anzeiger der Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien. Philosophische--Historische Klasse 90(1953) 3-4. ‫נ‬

activity of a priestly scribal class, not popular folklore. We see the signs of learned interpretation in the commentary style of the Demotic Chronicle and in the imposing learning of Berossus. The signs of learned activity can also be seen in Jewish apocalyptic writings. The Jews who wrote (and read) sibylline oracles in epic Greek hexameters were not the rank and file of the peasantry. The eschatological prophecies of Qiimran were produced by prolonged study of the biblical texts. Von Rad has noted the frequency with which the pseudonymous authors of apocalyptic books are presented as wise men—Daniel, Enoch, Ezra, Baruch, etc.39 Daniel may serve as a good example of the self-understanding of the Jewish apocalyptist. Unlike most pseudonymous writings, Daniel's visions are prefaced by a collection of tales which establish the hero's character. He is explicidy portrayed as a wise man, trained in the professional skills of the Chaldeans and in their language and literature (Dan 1:4). The book of Daniel also provides our best clue for the social function of this literature. The heroes of the book, who are universally understood to represent the circle in which the book was written, are the wise, maskilîm (Dan 11t33j35).40 These are an elite group, and are the only people who have true understanding. Their task in the eschatological crisis was to instruct the masses (yābînû lārabbîm, 11:33). Their literature and wisdom may be described as esoteric in so far as it was produced by a restricted, learned class. However, it was not esoteric in the sense of being secret. It was intended for the rabbîm and could therefore be said to be hortatory in purpose. In the context of Daniel it was clearly intended to inspire resistance to the Hellenistic king, a purpose shared by such nonJewish works as the Demotic Chronicle, Potter's Oracle and Bahman Yasht. Jewish apocalyptic literature was a learned phenomenon, produced by maskîlîm or wise men. This, however, is not to support the thesis of Von Rad that Jewish apocalyptic derives from "wisdom." 41 There is no manifest relation between the "wisdom" expressed in the visions of Daniel or Enoch and the collections of sayings found in Proverbs or Ben Sira. It may be that there were other wisdom circles in Judaism than those represented by Proverbs and Ben Sira. Job, at least, makes far greater use of the ancient myths than do the other 39

316.

G. von Rad, Theologie des Alten Testaments (4th ed.; Munich: Kaiser, 1965) 2.

40 See for example M. Dekor, Le Livre de Daniel (Paris: Gabalda, 1971) 15-19; V. Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization and the Jews (New York: Atheneum, 1970). 41 For a fuller critique see Collins, "The Court Tales of Daniel."

wisdom books.42 However the relation of J o b to the rest of the wisdom tradition is unclear at best. The identity and social place of the mas/ctlîm of Daniel or the authors of other apocalyptic books must remain largely enigmatic. 43 We may, however, infer from the characters of Daniel, Enoch and other pseudonymous heroes, from the scribal activity of Qumran, and from the learned transmission of mythology in Mesopotamia that the apocalyptic books were produced by people of some learning. The analogy with the revived interest in ancient mythology elsewhere in the Hellenistic Near East may provide a clue as to the provenance of the mythical materials used in Jewish apocalyptic literature. We know that traditions dating back to the second millennium were available and were used in both Egypt and Babylon. In these areas the old traditions had been passed on not only in the royal cult but also in the scribal schools. Jewish apocalyptic writings drew on mythical traditions of Israelite and Canaanite origins, of which the best examples are often found in the Ugaritic texts from the second millennium BC.44 We do not know in what form such traditions were available in the Hellenistic age or how they had been transmitted, but some ancient Phoenician and Canaanite traditions were available to Philo Byblius in the first century AD.45 In Israel too it is inevitable that there were more extensive traditions than those preserved in the biblical canon. We should expect that certain mythological materials were associated with the royal cult in the pre-exilic period but these could not have had a cultic Sitz-im-Leben in the post-exilic period. It is possible however that they were passed on in learned circles, either in Palestine or in the Diaspora. Job's frequent use of mythic materials may be significant in this respect. In any case, in view of the survival of Canaanite materials in Byblos there is no reason why ancient lore should not have been available to Jewish writers in the Hellenistic age.

12

Sec M.H. Pope, Job (AB 15; Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1973) passim: F.M. Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrav Epic (Cambridge, MA: Harvard, 1973) 344-5! 4 ‫ י‬A number of apocalyptic writings arc associated with the Qumran community. In addition to the properly sectarian documents such as the War Scroll, fragments of other apocalyptic writings such as I Enoch have been found at Qumran. It is not clcar whether any of these latter originated in the community. 44 Emerton, "The Origin of the Son of Man Imagery;" Cross, Canaanite Myth, 345. 45 See J. Barr, "Philo of Byblos and his Phoenician History," BJRL 57(1974) 17-63.

Prophecy by interpretation Jewish apocalypticism grew out of a situation of political, cultural, and religious alienation, that was due in large part to foreign domination in the Hellenistic and Roman periods. 46 In interpreting that situation it had recourse to the patterns and motifs of ancient mythology. This process is paralleled in other Near Eastern states in the Hellenistic age. We have noted the learned character of the use of ancient myths in this period. This fact is significant not only for the identity of the groups which produced this literature but also for the understanding of revelation which was involved. This may be described as prophecy by interpretation and may be illustrated by the Hebrew term pesher. The term pesher is most familiar from the Qumran scrolls where it refers to a particular mode of interpreting scripture with reference to eschatological events.47 The word is also used in the book of Daniel, however, to refer to the interpretation of dreams and of the mysterious writing on the wall. It ultimately derives from an Akkadian term for dream interpretation. 48 Its use in Daniel and Qumran points up a fundamental difference between Jewish apocalypticism and biblical prophecy. In prophecy, revelation consisted of the direct transmission of the word of God. In apocalypticism, it involves the interpretation of mysterious realities which are given cryptically in scripture, dreams and other phenomena. T h e importance of biblical interpretation in apocalypticism and in post-exilic Judaism in general has often been emphasized. 49 Less attention has been paid, however, to two points which qualify this observation: First, the interpretation of scripture (i.e. a revered writing from the past) in such a way as to produce an eschatological prophecy was not peculiar to Judaism. In the Egyptian Demotic Chronicle we find an almost exact parallel to the Qumran pesharim, where a text is 6 ‫י‬ of apocalypticism, but refers to a universally recognized factor in the composition of several major works, such as Daniel, much of 1 Enoch, 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch. 47 See F.F. Bruce, Biblical Exegesis in the Qiimran Texts (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1959); O. Betz, Offenbarung und Schriftforschung in der Qumransekte (WUNT 6; Tübingen: Mohr, 1960). 48 A.L. Oppenheim, "The Interpretation of Dreams in the Ancient Near East," Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 46(1956) 217; A. Finkel, "The pesher of Dreams and Scriptures," ÄroQ,5(1963) 357-70. 49 E.g. J . Wellhausen, Skizzen und Vorarbeiten (Berlin: Reimer, 1899) 225-34; L. Hartman, Prophecy Interpreted (Lund: Gleerup, 1966).

interpreted line by line.50 Such specific commentary was relatively rare in either Jewish or Gentile writings. More typical is the weaving together of traditional motifs, in such a way as to reapply the language of the older scripture without giving a direct commentary. We find this midrashic tendency in the Potter's Oracle, both in the use of traditional motifs in its original composition and in the redaction of the oracle itself by later additions. We may also note how the Bahman Yasht has been expanded and reapplied in the Pahlevi form which is now extant. Second, the interpretation of scripture is part of a broader phenomenon of prophecy by interpretation. As we have seen, the word pesher could also be used to refer to the interpretation of dreams. In Daniel we find the interpretation of a scriptural prophecy (the seventy years of Jeremiah, Daniel 9) side by side with the interpretation of visions and dreams. Now the interpretation of the visions in Daniel involves an elaborate literary fiction. There is no reason to doubt that both vision and interpretation were composed by the same author. However, Daniel is not merely said to have had the vision. It must be explained to him by an angelic interpreter. Revelation is not given directly, but is mediated by interpretation. The extended allegorical visions of 1 Enoch similarly posit the necessity of interpretation. We have noted the role of interpretation in the Demotic Chronicle, where a text is expounded. In the Persian Bahman Yasht the schema of the four kingdoms is presented in an allegorical vision followed by an interpretation, in a manner very reminiscent of Daniel 2. T h e same style of prophecy by interpretation is found in the widespread use of astrological predictions in the Hellenistic world.51 Astrology was especially associated with the Chaldeans 52 but its influence in Egypt is attested by the oracles of Nechepso and Petosiris.53 Especially in the latter work astral phenomena are repeatedly interpreted with reference to political upheavals. In each case, whether the data to be interpreted be scripture, stars or 50 F. Daumas, "Littérature prophétique et exegétique égyptienne et commentaires esséniens," in A. Barucq, ed.. A la rencontre de Dieu: Memorial Albert Gelin (Le Puy: Mappus, 1961) 203-21. 51 F. Cumont, Astrology and Religion among the Greeks and Romans (Reprint of 1912 edition; New York: Dover, 1960); A.M.J. Fcstugicre, La Révélation de Hermes Trimégiste (4 vols.; Paris: Gabalda, 1944-54) 1.89-186. 52 Sec the description of the Chaldeans in Diodorus 2.29-31; H.L.Jansen, Die Henochgestalt (Norske videnskapsakademi i Oslo. Historisk-filosofisk Klasse Skrifter 1 ; Oslo: Dybwad, 1939) 13-19. 53 E. Riess, "Nechepsonis et Pctosiridis fragmenta magica," Philologus Supplementband 6(1892-93) 329-88; W. Kroil, "Nechepso, PWRE 10(1935) 2160-7.

allegorical visions, revelation is given indirectly and requires the mediation of a wise interpreter. 54 This style of prophecy by interpretation differs from earlier biblical prophecy by its suggestion of determinism. A prophecy of this kind is not simply a threat or a promise whose fulfilment is conditional on a certain human response. Rather the events of the future are already contained in the texts which are interpreted, or in the movements of the stars. No human actions can influence them. The objective of this type of prophecy is not to change the course of events but to understand and adapt. 55 The deterministic implications of this style of revelation were augmented throughout the Hellenistic world by the use of pseudepigraphy. Pseudepigraphy is an extremely complex phenomenon, which is attested in all kinds of literature in all ages, for quite diverse motives.56 However, the extent of its use in political prophecy of the Hellenistic age is remarkable. T h e Demotic Chronicle, written after the advent of the Greeks, is ascribed to the time of Pharaoh Tachos. T h e Potter , s Oracle is ascribed to the time of King Amenhotep. The Persian political oracles are ascribed to the legendary figures of Hystaspes and Zoroaster. Sibylline oracles were written throughout the Hellenized world from Rome to Egypt.57 In view of this phenomenon it is impossible to explain Jewish pseudepigraphy purely by the alleged decline of prophecy and closing of the canon. 58 It is part of a wider phenomenon of the Hellenistic world. It must be related to the widespread esteem for antiquity in this period and the conviction that age is a guarantee of truth. 59 In political oracles pseudepigraphy must be related to the interest in the ancient myths and legends which we have noted. In each case there is a turning to 54

Cf. the role of the Teacher of Righteousness in the Qumran community. On astrological speculation at Qumran see J . Carmignac, "Les horoscopes de Qumrân," RevQ 6( 1964-65) 199-206; M. Delcor, "Recherches sur un horoscope en langue hebraique provenant de Qumrân," ReuQ 7( 1965-66) 521-42; Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, 1.237-8. 55 Precedent for this kind of revelation can be found in the so-called "Akkadian apocalypses" of an earlier period. See A.K. Grayson, Babylonian HisUnical-Literary Texts (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1975); W.G. Lambert, The Background of Jewish Apocalyptic (London: Athlone, 1978). 56 B.M. Metzger, "Literary Forgeries and Canonical Pseudepigrapha," JBL 91(1972) 3-24. 57 V. Nikiprowetzky, La Troisième Sibylle (Paris: La Haye, 1970) 1-10. Persian and Babylonian sibyls are also mentioned in ancient sources, but their existence is doubtful. 58 So especially R.H. Charies, APOT 2.ix. 59 For a similar attitude in Hellenistic philosophy see O. Gigon, "Die Erneuerung der Philosophie zur Zeit Ciceros," in W.K.C. Guthrie et al., ed., Recherches sur la Tradition Platonicienne. Fondation Hart Entretiens Tome III (Verone: Valdonega, 1957) 25-65.

the distant past for wisdom to illumine the present. This phenomenon attests a sense of alienation and loss of meaning in the present, and a conviction that bygone ages had greater wisdom. Whatever factors led to the use of pseudepigraphy in apocalyptic literature, there can be no doubt that one of its effects was to increase the sense of determinism. If all things could be foretold by Hystaspes, Enoch, or the Sibyl, and the accuracy of their predictions could be shown by lengthy ex eventu prophecy, then the course of events must already have been determined in their time.60 Of course there is a measure of determinism in all predictive prophecy and the tablets of destiny are an ancient feature of Mesopotamian religion. The impression of determinism, however, is greatly increased by the use of pseudepigraphy and ex eventu prophecy. Determinism is widely recognized as a factor in the Zeitgeist of the Hellenistic age/' 1 Like the esteem for antiquity, it attests a sense of alienation from the present. People who turned to deterministic views of history had little confidence in their ability to control the course of events. In the Near East the loss of confidence in the present and the political process can be traced directly to the loss of national independence and the consequent disorientation of politics and religion. In Greece and Rome a similar transformation was produced by the transition from city-state to world-empire, 62 which also involved the disruption of the traditional molds of politics and religion. Conclusions It has been the purpose of this essay to draw attention to some of the aspects ofJewish apocalypticism which were typical of the Hellenistic Near East. The discussion could be extended indefinitely. Most of the features by which apocalypticism is usually distinguished from prophecy — periodization, expectation of the end of the world, afterlife, esoteric symbolism, dualism etc.— are found throughout the Hellenistic world and must be considered representative of the Zeitgeist of late antiquity. The fact that these features became prominent in Judaism only after the exile, at a time when they were also widespread in the neighboring religions, cannot be entirely coincidental. 60 An intriguing example of this kind of prophecy from Hellenistic Grccce is the Alexandra of Lycophron. See Collins, The Sibylline Oracles, 8. 61 A.M.J. Festugière, Personal Religion among the Greeks (Berkeley: University of California, 1954) 41. 62 M.P. Nilsson, Geschichte der griechischen Religion //(Munich: Beck, 1950) 279; H. Jonas, The Gnostic Religion (2nd ed.; Boston: Beacon, 1963) 5-7; 241-65.

There have been unending debates as to whether apocalypticism is "essentially" a child of Old Testament prophecy 63 or a product of Hellenistic-oriental syncretism, 64 or a borrowing from Iranian religion.65 O u r thesis in this essay is that such alternatives distort the question and can only be misleading. Apocalypticism was not a "borrowing" from any source whatever, but is a phenomenon in its own right, with complex sources. We would agree with Hanson that there is indeed continuity with Old Testament tradition, which can be traced back ultimately to the Canaanite myths. Continuity, however, implies development, and therefore change. The manner in which apocalypticism developed Israelite traditions is closely paralleled by developments in other traditions in the Hellenistic Near East. Therefore, continuity with the past, with Israelite tradition, is complemented by continuity with its contemporary environment. The continuity ofJewish apocalypticism with the Hellenistic Near East has two dimensions. O n the one hand there are certainly cases of the direct influence of motifs and ideas. The international use of the schema of the four kingdoms is a case in point. However, even in such cases the motifs which are borrowed must have a point of contact in the native tradition. If the Persian imagery of light and darkness can be used in the Qumran War Scroll, it is only because the imagery of light and darkness was already associated with holy war in the Old Testament in a less developed way.66 More important, however, are other phenomena which cannot be explained as simple borrowings but are independent, parallel developments in the various traditions, due to similar conditions. The expectation of an ideal future king in both Egypt and Judah in the Hellenistic age is due, not to influence in either direction, but to the loss of native kingship in both countries. Despite the manifold similarities among the various states in the Hellenistic age, each tradition retained its identity. Jewish apocalypticism is quite distinct from the political expectations of Egypt, but the differences are not greater than those between Egypt and Babylon in the same period. The major factor which caused similar parallel developments in the various traditions, and thereby constituted a common Zeitgeist, was the spread of Hellenistic power and culture throughout the Near 63

So H.H. Rowley, The Relevance of Apocalyptic (New York: Association, 1964). H.D. Betz, " O n the Problem of the Religio-Historical Understanding of Apocalypticism," Apocalypticism. Journalfor Theology and the Church 6(1969) 134-56. 65 W.R. Murdock, "History and Revelation in Jewish Apocalypticism," Interpretation 21(1967) 167-87. 66 J.J. Collins, "The Mythology of Holy War in Daniel and the Qumran War Scroll," FT25(1975) 596-612. 64

East. This caused a disruption in the traditional order and therefore led to a loss of meaningfulness and to alienation. We have looked briefly at a few of the more conspicuous phenomena which reflect that alienation—determinism, revival of ancient myths, pseudepigraphy. Underlying all of these phenomena is a new world view in which the present is valued less than the remote past or the idealized future. The extent to which the world view of the Near Eastern peoples was transformed by the new political situation of the Hellenistic age has never been adequately studied and lies well beyond the scope of this paper. 67 Yet it is only against the background of such an overall world view that we can understand the relationships between the various national traditions. We can no longer consider Israelite tradition and Hellenistic syncretism as mutually exclusive alternatives. Rather we must appreciate that the particular manner in which tradition was adapted in Judaism in the Hellenistic age was molded by the Zeitgeist of the entire Near East.

67

See especially J.Z. Smith, "Birth Upside Down or Right Side Up?" History of Religions 9(1970) 281-303; "A Place on Which to Stand: Symbols and Social Change," Worship 44(1970) 457-74.

C H A P T E R FIVE

APOCALYPTIC E S C H A T O L O G Y AS T H E T R A N S C E N D E N C E O F DEATH

Ever since the work of Albert Schweitzer, 1 the terms "apocalyptic" and "eschatology" have occasioned lively debate in N T studies.2 More recently they have again come to the forefront in the assertion by Ernst Käsemann that "Apocalyptic is the mother of Christian theology," 3 and in the theological writings of Jürgen Moltmann and Wolfhart Pannenberg. 4 Despite the theological weight often placed on these terms, their connotation is far from clear. Not only is the relation between the two terms disputed but neither term individually carries a clear meaning. 5 In the case of eschatology, some scholars distinguish between a stricter and a looser understanding of the term. 6 Others refuse to describe as "eschatological" anything which does not involve the end of the world.7 The term "apo1

A. Schweitzer, The Quest of the Historical Jesus (New York: Macmillan, 1969). This article is the text of the Boylan lecture to the Irish Biblical Association, Dec. 6, 1972, at Earlsfort Terrace, Dublin. Translations of biblical passages are taken from the New American Bible. 3 Käsemann's thesis has been presented in two essays in Robert Funk, ed., Journal for Theology and the Church 6 (1969): "The Beginnings of Christian Theology" (pp. 17-46) and "On the Topic of Primitive Christian Apocalyptic" (pp. 99-133). The volume also contains reactions to Käsemann's views by Gerhard Ebeling and Ernst Fuchs. 4 Jürgen Moltmann, Theology of Hope (tr. J.W. Leitch; London: SCM Press, 1967): Wolfhart Pannenberg, Revelation as History (London: Sheed and Ward, 1969). The views of Pannenberg and his circle on apocalypticism depend heavily on the work of Dietrich Rössler, Gesetz und Geschichte (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1960) and are most fully expressed by Ulrich Wilckens, "The Understanding of Revelation Within the History of Primitive Christianity," in Revelation a* History, 55-122. 5 O n the history of the discussion of "apocalyptic" see especially two recent books, J.M. Schmidt, Die Jüdische Apokalyptik (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag des Erziehungsvereins, 1969) and Klaus Koch, The Rediscovery of Apocalyptic (Naperville, Illinois: Allenson, 1972). The debate on the term "eschatology" is summarized by Hans-Peter Müller, Ursprünge und Strukturen alttestamentlicher Eschatologie (BZAW 109; Berlin: Töpelmann, 1969) 1-11. See also H.D. Preuss ,Jahweglaube und Zukunftserwartung (BWANT 87; Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1968). 6 So, for example, Th.C. Vriezen, "Prophecy and Eschatology," Vetus Testamentum Supplement I (Leiden: Brill, 1953), 199-229; G. von Rad, Old Testament Theology (tr. D.M.G. Stalker; Edinburgh & London: Oliver and Boyd, 1965) 2.114-115. 7 So G. Hölscher, Die Ursprünge der jüdischen Eschatologie (Glessen: Töpelmann, 1925) 3; S. Mowinckel, He That Cometh (tr. G.W. Anderson; Oxford: Blackwells, 1959) 126, and most recently, J . van der Ploeg, "Eschatology in the Old Testament" OTS 17 (1972)89-99. 2

calyptic" has been used with nuances ranging from a particular literary form of revelation literature to a philosophy of life prevalent in the intertestamental period. 8 The juxtaposition of the words "eschatology" and "apocalyptic" in our title potentially evokes the shades of several different scholarly debates. Did the pre-exilic prophets have an eschatology? What is the relation between eschatology and history? Is apocalypticism the child of prophecy? Should "apocalyptic" be defined by its form or its content? What is the theological value of apocalyptic? and so forth. It is important therefore that we begin by sorting out those questions and making clear which ones we will address and which we will pass. Let us start from the minimum which is universally agreed—both "eschatology" and "apocalyptic" have some association with future expectation. Further, every scholar agrees that the future expectation of the pre-exilic prophets was significantly different from the type of future expectation found in the book of Daniel and certain works of intertestamental Judaism which are usually referred to as "apocalyptic." The existence of these two types of future expectation is admitted by all, even though there is much disputation as to the names by which we may refer to them. Much of this disputation is purely terminological and makes no real contribution to our understanding of either phenomenon. Accordingly, I do not wish to enter into the purely terminological discussion which has recently been engaged by Carmignac and van der Ploeg.9 Rather I wish to consider the phenomenon of future expectation in the Jewish tradition, in particular the later type, found in Daniel and the intertestamental works. By the term "apocalyptic eschatology" I merely wish to refer to this type of future expectation. 10 I am aware that not all the material in the so-called "apocalyptic books" is explicitly relevant to future expectations. Apocalypses, as their name suggests, are largely revelations of heavenly secrets. As examples of this fact we might mention the heavenly journeys of Enoch in 1 Enoch 1-36 or the description of the movements of the stars in the so-called "book of the heavenly luminaries" in 1 Enoch 8 In addition to the literature listed in notes 3 and 4 above see the collection of essays in Interpretation 25 (1971), and the discussions by Gerhard von Rad, Theologie des Allen Testaments (4th ed.; München: Kaiser, 1965) 2.315-330 and Martin Hengel, Judentum und Hellenismus (Tübingen: Mohr, 1969) 319-380. 9 Jean Carmignac, "La Notion d'Eschatologie dans la Bible et à Qumran," RevQ 7(1969) 17-31; van der Ploeg, "Eschatology in the Old Testament." 10 I borrow the phrase "apocalyptic eschatology" from Paul D. Hanson, 'Jewish Apocalyptic Against its Near Eastern Environment" RB 68 (1971) 35.

72-82." I will argue later in this essay that the revelation of these heavenly secrets is not in fact irrelevant to the future expectations of their writer. However, in delimiting my subject I am guided primarily by the passages which deal explicidy with future expectations. I do not propose to discuss all aspects of the phenomenon of apocalypticism but only the aspect of future expectation. Two further points I take as given. First, the distinction between the manner in which the future expectation of the prophets is presented and the manner of presentation in apocalyptic literature has been adequately described.12 Apocalyptic literature is marked by pseudonymity and its revelations are mediated by visions and dreams to a far greater extent than is the case in the prophetic writings. These literary devices lessen the immediacy of the apocalypticisms visions. As a result the visions appear to impart information about a predetermined future rather than an existentiell call to repentance. 13 This difference in immediacy I take to be generally accepted. My concern is different. I ask rather about the content of the future expectation. Irrespective of whether the future was predetermined or not, was the apocalyptic view of what was going to happen in any way different from what the prophets expected? It will become evident that the literary form of the apocalypses is in fact significant for their future expectation. Secondly, I take it that all scholars agree that the expectation of the prophets focused on the life of the nation. Whether they prophesied doom or salvation, the issue was the peace and prosperity of Israel in the promised land. As we shall see, there is no such unanimity on the central issue of apocalyptic eschatology. Many attempts to distinguish the central issue of the later type of future expectation from the prophetic type have been blurred by the confusing data of postexilic prophecy. For that reason I wish to omit postexilic prophecy from my discussion, and concentrate on the fully developed apocalyptic eschatology as typified by the book of Daniel.14 " This fact was stressed by von Rad, Theology of the Old Testament, 2. 307 and, in greater detail, by M.E. Stone, "Lists of Revealed Things in the Apocalyptic Literature," in F.M. Cross, et al., ed., Magnolia Dei: The Mighty Acts of God (Garden Citv, New York: Doubleday, 1976) 439-43. 2 ‫י‬ Zechariah," Vetus Testamentum Supplement 22 (1972) 47-71. Von Rad, Old Testament Theology, 2. 304-305. 13 O n the question of determinism in apocalypticism see especially P. von der Osten-Sacken, Die Apokalyptik in ihrem Verhältnis zu Prophetic und Weisheit (Theologische Existenz Heute, 157; München: Kaiser, 1969). 14 This is not to dispute the crucial importance of postexilic prophecy as the time of transition from the future expectation of the prophets to apocalyptic eschatology.

My objective, then, is to clarify the distinctive character of the later type of Jewish future expectation as found in the book of Daniel and the intertestamental apocalypses, over against the expectation of the prophets. My essay will have three parts. (1) First, I will examine some attempts which have been made to formulate the distinctive character of apocalyptic eschatology and which I consider unsuccessful. (2) Secondly, I will present my own formulation and support it by an examination of apocalyptic texts. (3) Thirdly, I will comment on the historical and theological significance of this particular type of future expectation. Unsuccessful Formulations Although the existence of two types of future expectation in the Old Testament is generally admitted, and although several scholars of note have attempted to formulate the distinction, no clear and consistent formulation has yet, to my knowledge, been made. We may begin by discussing some of the formulations which have been proposed. a. The Idea of a Definitive End Julius Wellhausen and his followers felt that only the future expectation of the postexilic period could rightly be called eschatology. This term they then reserved for a belief in the end of the world. 15 This formulation emphasizes a dualism which is both temporal and cosmological. With some slight variations, it is still the formulation most widely found. So Th.C. Vriezen, in distinguishing the looser and stricter senses of eschatology writes: In a narrower sense the only thing we can understand by it is the

apocalyptic form of 'olam habba' as against the 'olam hazzeh, or life in heaven as against life on earth,

while he also argues for the validity of applying the term eschatology to the earlier form of prophetic expectation "even if there is no See Paul D. Hanson,'s articles "Jewish Apocalyptic Against its Near Eastern Environment," RB 68 (1971) 31-58 and "Old Testament Apocalyptic Rcexamined," Int 25 (1971) 454-479 and his book, The Daivn of Apocalyptic (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975). Also Otto Plögcr, Theocracy and Eschatology (tr. S. Rudman; Oxford: Blackwclls, 1968); R. North "From Prophecy to Apocalyptic via Zechariah," 47-71 and Samuel Amslcr, "Zacharie et l'origine de l'apocalyptique" Vêtus Testamentum Supplement 22 (1972) 227-231. 15 See the review by Müller, Ursprünge und Strukturen, 2 ff. Hugo Grcssmann shared this definition of eschatology but claimed to find it already in the pre-exilic prophets.

question of the destruction of the kosmos." 16 Here, as in Wellhausen the essential difference between the two types is that in the later type the world is destroyed. Similarly Sigmund Mowinckel, while less clear-cut in his definition, also seems to share this view. He writes: Eschatology is a doctrine or a complex of ideas about 'the last things,' which is more or less organically coherent and developed. Every eschatology includes in some form or other a dualistic conception of the course of history, and implies that the present state of things and the present world order will suddenly come to an end and be superseded by another of an essentially different kind...The universe itself is thrown into the melting pot... 1 '

Mowinckel goes on to say that eschatology in this sense was not found in the pre-exilic prophets. Further: Any sober historical consideration which avoids the confusion of different ideas will recognize that Deutero-Isaiah himself does not yet present a true eschatology. We miss the idea of a definite end to the present order, and of a new world of an essentially different character from this one. 18

Such expressions as "the present order of things" are extremely vague. All future hope can be described as the hope for "a new order of things." This in itself gives us no basis for distinguishing one type of future hope from another. Mowinckel would certainly admit that Deutero-Isaiah hoped for a new order of things. What is essential in his definition is the idea of a definite end. There are two facets to this idea. One is the cosmological destruction of the world and the other is the temporal end of history. We may discuss these two facets separately since they do not necessarily coincide. Human history can come to an end without the destruction of the world. Neither facet, however, provides an adequate formulation of the distinctive character of apocalyptic eschatology. First, the cosmological end of the world is certainly a very important motif in some apocalyptic texts. Perhaps its classical expression is that found in 4 Ezra 7:30-31: Then shall the world be returned to primeval silence seven days, like as the first beginnings, so that no man is left. And it shall be, after seven days, that the Age which is not yet awake shall be aroused, and that which is corruptible shall perish.

We might also mention the gospel passage, "Heaven and earth shall pass away but my word will not pass away." 19 However, there are 16 17 18 19

Vriezen, "Prophecy and Eschatology," 199. Mowinckel, He That Cometh, 125-126. Ibid., 266. Luke 21:23. cf. also Rev 21:1.

important apocalyptic texts which do not refer to an end of the world. Notable among these is our prime example of pre-Christian apocalyptic eschatology—the book of Daniel. There we read of a resurrection, and we are told that the just will shine like stars, but nothing is said of a transition to a new world. The term qēs, which is usually translated "end," occurs in Dan, but never as the "end" of anything in particular and seems to refer to "a time of crisis" rather than to a definitive end. 20 Again in the Qumran Scrolls, there is only one passage, in the third column of the Hodayot, which possibly speaks of the destruction of the world.21 Yet the Scrolls are generally recognized as the literature of an "apocalyptic community." 22 The idea of the definitive destruction of the world is also missing in certain sections of 1 Enoch (chs 1—36 and 91 —105, apart from the Apocalypse of Weeks). Yet no one will deny that these texts exemplify the later, fuller, type of future hope which is described as apocalyptic eschatology. It is clear then that the distinctive character of this type of future expectation does not consist of the belief in the end of the world. The second aspect of the formulation of Wellhausen and Mowinckel, which sees a definitive end as the essential character of the later expectation, is the idea of a temporal end, an end of history. Now the only sense in which we could unambiguously speak of an "end of history" is with reference to the final destruction of all human life. This of course is never the case, in any of the Jewish or Christian texts. In any looser sense, we can only speak of the end of one period of history, which really means the transition from one period to another. If history means the account of human actions, then we can obviously find a new period of history even in a new creation, as can be seen in Isa 65:17fT.: Lo I am about to create new heavens and a new earth;...No longer shall there be in it an infant who lives but a few days, or an old man who does not round out his full life-time; he dies a mere youth who

30 It is used in parallelism to the word mô'êd in 11:21, ki 'od qës lammô'ëd and again in 11:35 'ad 'it qës ki 'ôd lammô'ëd and the word mô'ëd occurs in 11:29 in a noncschatological sense as "appointed time." 21 1QH 3:29-33: "Then the floods of Belial go over all steep banks like a fire that devoureth all their...in order to destroy every green and dry tree by their channels, and it sweepeth with burning flames until all that drink of them are no more; it devoureth the foundations of clay and the extension of the dry land; and the foundations of the mountains become a burning, and the roots of flint becomc streams of pitch and it devoureth right down to the great deep." (Tr. Svcnd HolmNielsen, Hodayot [Aarhus: Univcrsitetsforlagct, 1960] 65). 22 In the phrase of F.M. Cross, Jr., The Ancient Library of Qumran and Modem Biblical Studies (Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1958) 56.

reaches but a hundred years, and he who fails of a hundred shall be thought accursed. They shall live in the houses they build, and eat the fruit of the vineyards they plant...

Most of all a formulation based on the idea of the "end of history" cannot provide us with an adequate conceptual framework to contain a notion like Dodd's "realized eschatology5' or the belief of the Qumran community that it had already made the transition to a new form life, while still in this life, in history. 23 In short, despite the fact that the term eschatology is normally used to describe it, the future hope of late postexilic and intertestamental Judaism cannot be defined with reference to "the end" of something. By this conclusion I repudiate the recent attempt of J . van der Ploeg, to reduce the term "eschatology" to a narrow etymological connotation. 24 Even apart from the questionable appropriateness of trying to equate the meaning of a word with its etymology, the attempt manifesdy fails to work. For van der Ploeg, It is abundantly clear what Old or New Testament eschatology should mean in theology, the knowledge of the end of this period, this time, and of the rather short space of time which precedes the end. It is more specified by what precedes than by what follows.

So, even though van der Ploeg admits that Second Isaiah pronounces the end of an era, he cannot be said to have an eschatology because he "is interested above all in what comes after." Van der Ploeg does not want to deny that there is any concern in "eschatological" passages for what comes after the end, but he insists that it is secondary and not essential. Yet he admits that "in the New Testament the accent lies rather on the birth of salvation" (p. 91). While it is true that most of the passages containing the word "eschaton" deal with the end of something (naturally enough), it is surely wrong to consider these passages decisive for the main interest of the books in which they occur. If the apocalyptic books were written, as is widely believed, to give hope to the faithful in times of oppression, it would be indeed extraordinary if they were primarily concerned with "the end" and not with what lies beyond it. This is in fact borne out by several passages in such recognized apocalyptic books as Revelation, 4 Ezra, and 2 Baruch, which speak at length of what lies beyond the destruction. 25 23

O n the "realized eschatology" of the Qumran community see especially H.W. Kuhn, Enderwartung und Gegenwärtiges Heil (SUNT 4; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966). Similady in the Apocalypse of Weeks (1 Enoch 93:1-10; 91:11-17) the crucial transition seems to take place within history, in the seventh of ten weeks. 24 J . van der Ploeg, "Eschatology in the Old Testament." 25 Revelation 21-22; 4 Ezra 7:89-101; 10:25-28; 2 Baruch 49-52; 72-74.

In fairness to van der Ploeg, it must be stated that his objective was merely to clarify the use of a term, not to outline a particular type of future expectation. Nevertheless, when he states that "true and explicit eschatology belongs to the apocalyptic literature," and proceeds to define eschatology in a narrow etymological sense, he is suggesting a false understanding of the apocalyptic books. b. The Distinction of Two Penods There is another type of formulation which has frequently been used to express the distinctive element of apocalyptic eschatology. This type of formulation focuses not on the definitive end, but on the transition from one period or age to another. So Johannes Lindblom has written that "our starting point must be the idea of two ages rather than the end of all things." 26 Similarly, van der Ploeg does not speak of the end of the world, but of the end of "this period." The crucial point about this type of formulation, however, is what one considers to be the end of a period. We have already seen that Mowinckel did not find the expectation of a new world order adequately expressed in Second Isaiah because that prophet did not speak of a definitive end to the old order. If the distinction between two ages requires the destruction of the world in between, then the doctrine of the two ages becomes a variant of the idea of the end of the world. 27 If on the other hand, the distinction is made between two historical periods, we cannot deny that such a distinction was made already by the pre-exilic prophets. Georg Fohrer has argued that the point of transition between the two types of expectation came when the "either‫־‬or" of the great prophets was transformed into a temporal doctrine of two ages.28 As examples of the latter he points to the emergence, in second and third Isaiah of an "eternal covenant" (Isa 55:3;61:8) with "eternal signs" (Isa 55:13), "eternal prosperity" (Isa 45:17; 51:6, 8) and "eternal peace" (Isa 51:11). But these expectations were not a purely postexilic phenomenon as Fohrer claims. Even apart from more controversial passages such as Isaiah 2 and 11 and Micah 4, the new covenant promised in Jeremiah 31 and the return to the desert followed by a new covenant in Hosea 2 already mark the transition from an age of change to an age of lasting good relations between Israel and God. 26

Johannes Lindblom, Prophecy in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Blackwells, 1962) 360. These two doctrines coincide in late apocalyptic texts such as Revelation and 4 Ezra. 28 "Die Struktur der alttestamentlichen Eschatologie" in Studien zur Alttestamentlichen Prophetie (BZAYV 99; Berlin: Töpelmann, 1967), 32-58. 27

Similarly Gerhard von Rad has said "the message of the prophets has to be termed eschatological wherever it regards the old historical bases of salvation as null and void." 29 He draws attention here to a highly significant point of transition in Israel's future hope, but one which was made already at the beginning of the period of the classical prophets. T h e hope for new institutions modeled on the old ones remained an important aspect of the future hope of the Jews right through the N T period. 30 However, this feature can already be found in the pre-exilic prophets, notably in Hosea 2 and Jeremiah 31. It became more frequent and more emphatic in later literature, but this shows how a continuous theme runs through prophetic and apocalyptic eschatology and is gradually developed. It illustrates the continuity between the two types of future hope. It does not show us the difference. c. Apocalypticism as Mythology A further type of formulation which has been applied to apocalyptic eschatology, is, if not entirely successful, distinctly more fruitful. This approach considers apocalypticism as a form of mythology. We may consider the recent formulation by Paul D. Hanson. Hanson defines prophetic eschatology as the announcement to the nation of the divine plans for Israel and the world which the prophet, with his insight into Yahweh's divine council, has witnessed unfolding within the covenant relationship between Israel and Yahweh, which plans the prophet proceeds to translate into the terms of plain history, real politics and human instrumentality,

whereas apocalyptic eschatology is the disclosure (usually esoteric in nature) to the elect of the prophetic vision of Yahweh's sovereignty (including his future dealings with his people, the inner dealings of the cosmos, etc.) which vision the visionaries have ceased to translate into terms of plain history, real politics and human instrumentality because of a pessimistic view of reality growing out of the bleak postexilic conditions in which the visionary group found itself.31

These definitions in a sense, deal with the form of presentation rather than the content. Even as formal descriptions they are not entirely satisfactory. The suggestion that the O T prophets 29

Von Rad, Old Testament Theology, 2.118. Cf. the dictum "Urzeit gleicht Endzeit." Cf. F.M. Cross, "New Directions in the Study of Apocalyptic" in Journal for Theology and the Church 6(1969)157-174; Mowinckel, He That Cometh, 1551Γ. 51 Hanson, , Jewish Apocalyptic Against its Near Eastern Environment," 34-35. 30

"translated" a mythical message into "plain history" smacks too much of twentieth century demythologizing. Surely both prophets and apocalypticists presented their message as they themselves saw it. If, however, we insist that both types of visionaries are reporting what they saw, then Hanson's definitions provide a good illustration of the intrinsic relation of the form to the message. For the prophets the most significant action takes place on earth. Even if a decision is taken in the divine council, it is acted out on earth, in "plain history." For the apocalypticists however, the most significant action takes place between heavenly mythological beings, in the conflict of God and Belial, Christ and Anti-Christ, angels and demons. In this respect apocalypticism shares the worldview of the ancient cosmic mythologies. 32 This shift of focus from earthly to heavenly events first emerges clearly in the book of Daniel, although it is partially visible in some of the postexilic prophets, notably Isaiah 24-27 and Zechariah. It carries with it a radical change in the nature of future hope. When the most significant action is situated among the heavenly beings then the main hope of human beings is to be elevated to this higher sphere of life. If human beings are elevated to the heavenly form of life, whether this happens by a resurrection after death or already before death, the restrictions of the human condition are cast off and in particular death is transcended. In classical biblical prophecy the issue had always been the life of the nation. Apocalypticism still deals with a communal context, whether it be the nation or, more often, the just, but its concern has extended to the life of the individual. By its focus on heavenly, supernatural realities it provides a possibility that human life can transcend death, not merely by the future generations of the nation but by passing to the higher, heavenly sphere. It is this hope for the transcendence of death which is the distinctive character of apocalyptic eschatology over against Old Testament prophecy. Apocalyptic Eschatology as the Transcendence of Death In support of this thesis I shall now adduce some texts from the second century BCE which are usually classified as "apocalyptic." My 32 The affities of apocalypticism with the ancient myths had of course often been noted before, notably by Hermann Gunkel, Schöpfung und Chaos (Göttingen: Vandenhocck & Ruprecht, 1895) and Hugo Grcssmann, Der Urspning der israelitischjüdischen Eschatologie (Göttingen: Vandenhocck & Ruprecht, 1905). Cf. also S.B. Frost "Eschatology and Myth," VT 2(1952) 70ÍT; F.M. Cross, "New Directions in the Study of Apocalyptic"; Amos Wilder, "Eschatological Imagery and Earthly Circumstance," NTS 5 (1959) 229-245 and on a more popular level, B.W. Anderson, Creation versus Chaos (New York: Association Press, 1967).

selection is determined by a number of factors. First, I adduce nothing earlier than the second century because the material in the late prophetic books, which is sometimes described as "apocalyptic" or "proto-apocalyptic"—such as Isaiah 24-27 or the book of Zechariah—represents the transition from prophetic to apocalyptic eschatology, but is not regarded as a full development of the later type of future hope. Secondly, I adduce nothing later than the first century BCE—i.e., I do not include the Book of Revelation, 4 Ezra or 2 Baruch, because they represent a further, later stage in the development of Jewish and Christian future expectation. In so limiting my texts I confine myself to one phase of Jewish apocalypticism. Later apocalyptic literature expressed the transcendence of death in different terms. Almost 300 years separate the book of Daniel from 4 Ezra. Thirdly, I avoid as far as possible works of uncertain origin such as the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs and the Apocalypse of Abraham. Much needs to be clarified about the provenance of these works before we can purposefully integrate them into the thought of any given period. My main text is the book of Daniel, and I will supplement this with reference to the Qumran Scrolls, 1 Enoch, Jubilees and the Assumption of Moses, all of which appear to have been written in Palestine in the second, or at latest, first century BCE. 3 3 First, let us consider the second half of the book of Daniel. Chapters seven and eight both consist of visions of heavenly events. These are followed by a prayer in ch. 9. This in turn is followed by two visions of the angel Gabriel, the first of which contains the famous prophecy of seventy weeks; the second of which contains a coded description of the Hellenistic wars, culminating in the judgment scene in Daniel 12. The first point we may notice is that chapters seven and eight deal with heavenly events and are not merely figurative descriptions of earthly batdes. I base this assertion chiefly on the use of the word (fdôsîm (Aramaic qaddîšîn) "holy ones." In ch. 7 we read that the "littie horn" was waging war with the holy ones and overcoming them, until the Ancient of Days came (7:21). In ch. 8 (10-11) "the litde horn pitted its strength against the host of heaven and some of the stars of heaven he cast to the ground." From the parallelism of 33 The Qumran community originated in the second century BCE but many of the texts may not have been composed until later. O n the dating of individual documents see F.M. Cross, The Ancient Library of Qumran, 34ff. On the date of the Assumption ofMoses and ofJubilees 23 see most recendy G.W. Nickelsburg, Resurrection, Immortality and Eternal Life in Intertestamental Judaism (HTS 26; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1972) 43-47.

these two verses, we can see that the q'dôsîm, holy ones, in Daniel are the angelic host.34 This is in fact the usual meaning of the term q'dôsîm in the O T and at Qumran. 3 5 In the book of Daniel this interpretation is borne out by the use of the term qādâš to designate an angelic figure in Dan 8:10, and the fact that in chapters ten and eleven the heavenly batde is fought between Michael and Gabriel on the one hand and the princes of Greece and Persia on the other. The "people of the holy ones," (7:27 and 8:24), however, surely refers to Israel.36 The possessive form is used to express the relationship between heavenly patrons and human people. In Dan 10:21 Michael is "your prince." In Dan 7 the expression is inverted—Israel is the people of Michael and his fellow angels. The kingdom attributed to the people is all under heaven and might be considered as a subdivision of the entire angelic kingdom. From the references in Daniel 10 to the angels of Greece and Persia it is apparent that the author of Daniel is working here with the old idea that each nation has a corresponding angelic "prince" who rules over it. This idea is old in biblical literature. Perhaps the locus classicus is Deuteronomy 32, where God set up the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God. 37 Here the nations and their angels are not identical but stand in direct correspondence with each other. A similar correspondence between humans on earth and the angelic host in heaven can be seen in Judg 5:19-20:

34

There are three possible interpretations of the "holy ones" in Daniel: (a) The term refers to Israel. This is the traditional interpretation, recently defended by C. W. Brekelmann, "The Saints of the Most High and their Kingdom," OTS 14 (1965) 305-329, and M. McNamara, Daniel, in The Neiv Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture (London: Nelson, 1969) 664. (b) It refers to the angelic host. So M. Noth, "The Understanding of History in Old Testament Apocalyptic" in The Laws of the Pentateuch and other Essays (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1967), 194-214. (c) It refers simultaneously to both Israel and the angelic host. So Annie Jaubert, La Notion d'Alliance dans le Judaïsme (Paris: Editions du Seuil, 1963) and most recently, S. Lamberigts, "Le sens de qdwšym dans les textes de Qumran," ETL 46 (1970) 24-39. I believe that the term qedâšîm refers to the angelic host, but that the "people of the holy ones" refers to Israel. 35 Ps 34:10 is the only clear exception. 36 Contra Noth, who regards this phrase as synonymous with "the holy ones of the Most High," see "The Understanding of History," 223. 3 ' So LXX, confirmed now by evidence from Qumran. The M T has "sons of Israel." See P.W. Skehan, "A fragment of the 'Song of Moses' (Dt 32) from Qumran," BASOR 136 (1954), 12-15. Also D. Barthélémy, "Les Tiqqunë Söpherim et la Critique Textuelle de l'ancien Testament," Vêtus Testamentum Supplement 9 (1962) 295.

The kings came and fought; then they fought, those kings of Canaan, at Thaanach by the waters of Megiddo...From the heavens the stars too fought; from their courses they fought against Sisera.38

Again in Isa 24:21 we read that Yahweh will punish "the host of heaven in the heavens and the kings of the earth on the earth. ‫ יי‬In all these passages we are dealing with a two-storey universe, where events happen on one level on earth but also on another level in the heavens." There are some glimpses in the Old Testament of a tradition of a batde between angelic beings in heaven. The most noted of these is perhaps Isa 14 which tells of the revolt of Helal ben Shachar. 39 This however is only a glimpse of a tradition which seldom comes to direct expression before Daniel and the rise of apocalypticism. Usually in the Old Testament, though Yahweh and his host fight from heaven, they fight against human, earthly enemies. 40 For a complete portrayal of batdes between divine beings we must go all the way back to the cosmic myths of ancient Canaan and Mesopotamia. 41 In the ancient mythologies the cosmic batde in the heavens was the significant action, while the earthly counterpart was only a by-product. T h e return of emphasis to the heavens as the locus of action is a very significant departure in Daniel and shows the acceptance of a world structure closely akin to the ancient mythologies. 42 Daniel, however, takes a significant step beyond what we find in either the ancient mythologies or in the earlier books of the Bible. It suggests that the just can be elevated to the heavenly sphere of life to join the angelic host. T h e text reads: 38

The importance of the human part of this synergism is emphasized in the Song of Deborah by the curse against Meroz, in vs. 23, because its inhabitants did not turn out to help Yahweh. 39 Cf. also the passage from Isa 24 quoted above. 40 Cf. the text from Judg 5 quoted above. Also Hab 3:12: "In wrath you bestride the earth, in fury you trample the nations." 41 The alternative would be to posit influence from Persian dualism. In Plutarch, De Inde et Osiride, 47flf., we read an account of the heavenly battle between the forces of Ormazd and Ahriman, which may very possibly have influenced the formulation of the war between the sons of light and the sons of darkness at Qumran. See David Winston, "The Iranian Component in the Bible, Apocrypha and Qumran," History of Religions, 5 (1966) 183-216. However, the few passages in the Bible to which we have referred are sufficient to indicate that there was a Canaanite-Palestinian tradition of a battle in the heavens. O n cosmic war in Ugarit and Mesopotamia see especially Patrick D. Miller, The Divine Wanior in Early Israel, (Harvard Semitic Monographs 5; Harvard University Press, 1973). 42 Daniel was not entirely original in this. Traces of this mythical pattern can already be found in the Isaiah apocalypse (Isa 24-27) and Zechariah, but only in Dan does it become fully evident.

Many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake; some shall live forever, others shall be an everlasting disgrace. But the wise shall shine brightly like the splendor of the firmament, and those who lead the many to justice shall be like the stars forever (Dan 12:2-3).

Some scholars have considered the reference to the stars here as a simple comparison. 43 This, however, is unlikely. The stars had long been identified with the angelic host in biblical tradition. In J u d g 5:20 the stars were said to fight against Sisera.44 The identification is explicit in Dan 8:10: "its power extended to the host of heaven, so, that it cast down to earth some of the host and some of the stars and trampled on them." The entire second half of Dan deals with the heavenly counterpart of the battle of the Jews with Antiochus Epiphanes on earth. There is nothing to suggest that the author was interested in the revival of earthly life. Rather, Dan 12:1-3 describes the final coming together of the two spheres of life by the elevation of the just to join the angelic host. This interpretation is confirmed by several passages in the contemporary literature. In particular we may cite 1 Enoch 104:2 which promises the just that "you will shine as the stars of heaven" and 104:6, "you will become companions to the hosts of heaven." Again in the Similitudes of Enoch (39:5) the dwelling places of the righteous are with the holy angels.45 In Dan this elevation is the result at once of a final judgment and a final battle. 46 It is, therefore, a vindication of the righteous. At the time at which Daniel was written this vindication was necessary especially for the martyred righteous who had lost their lives for their faith. The promise of elevation showed that this loss was not as absolute as might appear since the just were raised to a higher, lasting form of life. In Daniel the promise of elevation comes in temporal sequence at a future time. It involves the raising of the dead, although the elevation of the living is not excluded. 47 The impression is given that it only takes place at the end of a period, after a time of great tribulation. This is also the case in certain other works of the second century BCE. In Jub 23:27-31 the just are promised that "their bodies 4

‫ י‬So Aagc Bentzen, Darnel (2nd ed., Tübingen: Mohr, 1952) 52. Cf. also Isa 14, where Lucifer tried to set his throne above the stars of heaven. Further 1 Enoch 80:6; J o b 38:7; Sir 43:8f.; 2 Bar 51:10. 45 Cf. also Assumption of Moses, 10:7, where Israel is elevated to the stars. Matt 22:30: "At the resurrection men and women do not marry but are like angels in heaven." 46 See the discussion by Nickelsburg, Resurrection, 11 -28. 47 Cf. 1 Thes 4:13-18. 44

will rest in the earth and their spirits will have much joy." Here no resurrection is promised, but the just are assured that they will transcend death at a future time. Again, in the final section of 1 Enoch the elevation of the just to the stars comes at the conclusion of the judgment of a period and is definitely future. 48 This is also true of the corporate elevation of Israel in the Assumption of Moses, 10:9. T h e transcendence of death was not necessarily to be awaited as stricdy future. It could also be experienced as present reality. This seems to have been the case at least in the Qumran community. Although the Qumran sect is generally recognized as an apocalyptic community, there is no clear reference to the resurrection of the dead. 49 Various interpretations of the community's attitude to death and afterlife have been put forward. Chaim Rabin, amazingly, finds ample evidence of a belief in resurrection to confirm his thesis that the scrolls are Pharisaic. 50 At the other extreme R.B. Laurin finds no evidence of either immortality of the soul or resurrection of the body. 51 In between, most scholars find some form of spiritual immortality other than physical resurrection. 52 Most penetrating, perhaps is the analysis of H.W. Kuhn, who finds in the Scrolls and particularly in the Hodayot, the conviction of present participation in angelic life, coupled with the expectation of further fulfillment in the future. 53 Death does not arise as a theological problem in the Hodayot, because the community believed that it had already transcended death by passing over into the community of the angels. This is well illustrated by a passage in 1QH 3:19-23: 48 O n the eschatology of this section of 1 Enoch see Pierre Grelot, "L'Eschatologie des Esséniens et le Livre d'Henoch," RevQ 1 (1958/9) 113-31, and Nickelsburg, Resurrection, 112-130. In the first section of 1 Enoch (chapters 1-36) chap. 22 describes the abode of the souls while they await the day of judgment. The Similitudes of Enoch do not give a consistent picture. In 38:5 the righteous already dwell with the angels, but in chap. 51 a future resurrection is expected. The fourth section of 1 Enoch (chs 83-90) apparendy expects a future resurrection in 90:33. 49 This statement must be qualified in light of texts that were published subsequendy. See my review of this issue in Apocalypticism in the Dead Sea Scrolls (London: Roudedge, 1997). 50 C. Rabin, Qumran Studies (Oxford: Clarendon, 1957). For two possible references to resurrection in 1QH 6: 29, 34 cf. Nickelsburg, Resurrection, 150-151, who, like most scholars, rejects Rabin's interpretation. 51 R.B. Laurin, "The Question of Immortality in the Qumran Hodayot," JSS 3(1958) 344-355. 52 For a summary of the debate, with references, see Nickelsburg, Resurrection 144-145. 53 H.W. Kuhn, Enderwartung und Gegenwärtiges Heil (SUNT 4; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1966). A very similar position is held by Helmer Ringgrcn, The Faith of Qumran. Theology of the Dead Sea Scrolls (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1963).

I give thanks to you, Ο Lord, For you have redeemed me from the pit And from Sheol Abaddon you have lifted me up

to the eternal height (rum 'wlm) And I will walk to and fro on an unsearchable plain And I know that there is hope for him whom you have created from the dust for the eternal assembly, And the perverse spirit you have cleansed from great

transgression to be stationed with the host of the holy ones, And to enter into fellowship with the congregation of the children of heaven And you have apportioned to man an eternal destiny with the spirits of knowledge.

In this text it is apparent that the author is convinced that he already possesses eternal life. This conviction is repeated in 1QH 11:3-14: "You have cleansed man from sin... that he might be joined with the sons of your truth, and in a lot with your holy ones...with the everlasting host." 54 The conviction of the presence of the angelic host in the community is reflected in the "Messianic Rule": Nor shall anyone who is afflicted by any form of human uncleanness whatsoever be admitted into the assembly of God...for holy angels are present in their congregation. 55

In more general terms, 1QS 4:6-8 promises abundance of bliss, with length of days and fruitfulness and all blessings without end and eternal joy in perpetual life and the glorious crown and garment of honor in everlasting light.

Here again we find the promise of eternal life, with no mention of the fact of death. We cannot suppose that the authors of these documents believed that members of the community would not in fact die.56 In any case, the literature was produced over more than one generation, some of it clearly after the Teacher of Righteousness had passed away.57 Yet there is very little evidence of a belief in the resurrection of the dead. The reason for this can only be that the community believed that death was already transcended by its fellowship with the angelic host. 54

For a summary of the discussion of these passages with full references see Nickelsburg, Resurrection. 152-156. 1 follow Nickclsburg's translations here. 55 lQSa, 2:3-11. Cf. also IQM, 7:4-6. On the parallel to I Cor 11:10 sec Joseph A. Fitzmyer, "A Feature of Qumran Angclology and the Angels of 1 Cor 11:10," NTS 4 (1957-8) 48-58 (= Paul and Qumran, ed. J. Murphy-O'Connor; London: Chapman, 1968) 31-47. 5, ‫ י‬On the evidence of burials at Qumran see Roland de Vaux, L'Archéologie et les Mss de ta Mer Morte (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1961) 46-47. 5 ' This contradicts the view of Ringgrcn that the community ignored the belief

The fact that such a conception was possible for the Q u m r a n community shows that the most significant aspect of the future hope of second century Judaism was not the physical resurrection of the body, which was hardly envisaged at the time, nor a transformation of the earth, nor the ushering in of a new age, but the transition from one sphere of life to another. Such a transition is vertical rather than horizontal, spatial rather than temporal. I do not mean that it must be conceived in crudely spatial terms, that life with the heavenly host must be lived in a heaven distinct from earth. Evidendy the Q u m r a n community enjoyed this higher level of life right here on earth. Rather I mean that there is another sphere of life parallel to this. In the words of 4 Ezra, "the Most High made not one world, but two." 58 These two, however, are not only in temporal succession, as envisaged by 4 Ezra, and often thought to be typical of all Jewish apocalypticism. They are also contemporaneous, as envisaged by Daniel, 1 Enoch, and Qumran. The religious ideal of a life of heightened intensity and perfection was not entirely relegated to a future Utopia. It was also something eternally present in the heavenly court. This belief inevitably opened the way for some form of mystic participation in the higher form of life, even if only on a communal basis, as was the case at Qumran. 5 9 We may note that if we regard the world view of apocalypticism as a two-storey universe rather than as a theory of two world ages, we can see that revelations of heavenly secrets, such as we get in the heavenly journeys of Enoch and again in 1 Enoch chaps. 72-82, are not irrelevant to the eschatology of these works. If the future hope of the apocalypticist was to be elevated to a heavenly life, then any information about the heavenly regions where such life is most fully lived is relevant to that hope. In this way it is possible to find a coherent world view in the apocalyptic writings. Theological Conclusions There are two conclusions relevant to biblical theology which I wish to draw from the foregoing. O n e concerns the contrast of Greek and Hebrew thought which has been fashionable for some time in biblical theology. T h e other regards the logic of eschatological expectations, or the function filled by future expectation in the living out of present experience. in resurrection because earlier generations were of no relevance. 58 4 Ezra 7:40. 59 On an individual basis we should note the heightened interest in such figures as Enoch and Elijah in the intertestamental period.

a. Similarity to Greek Thought The hope for the transcendence of death in late postexilic Judaism inevitably reminds us of the Platonic idea of the immortality of the soul.60 Plato also believed in the existence of a higher world, the world of ideas, to which the good soul could be elevated upon death. As in most of the Jewish texts this transition in its complete form was basically something to be hoped for in the future, after the death of the individual, although he could participate in it proleptically by a good life and contemplation of the ideas here on earth. Both traditions believed that the righteous would experience an ultimate vindication which would not be cut off by death. Inevitably there were important differences between the Platonic tradition and Jewish apocalyptic eschatology. One was the far greater emphasis on personal mysticism in the Platonic tradition while the Jewish tradition remained predominantly interested in the community. In this, Jewish apocalypticism showed its roots in biblical prophecy. However the common ground remains highly significant. The essential point in both traditions is that earthly biological life is not the highest form of experience for which human beings can hope. There is a whole higher realm of life, expressed in the Jewish tradition by reference to the divine council and in the Platonic tradition by the world of ideas. Both traditions allow for some possibility of experiencing this higher life proleptically before death by living a just life.61 The similarity between the two traditions can be well illustrated from the ambiguities of the Wisdom of Solomon. Some scholars have interpreted this book fairly successfully from an almost exclusively Greek background. 62 Others have gone so far as to argue that it was written in Hebrew. 63 On the one hand we find such 60

For Plato's teaching on immortality sec cspccially the Phacdo and the myth of Er at the end of the Republic. 61 We may describe this higher form of life as the life of the spirit if we are careful to note that spirituality does not necessarily mean immateriality. Cf. R. North "Separated Spiritual Substances," CÖQ, 29 (1967) 419-449. In the Jewish texts the angelic form of life seems to be a state intermediate between God and man but the question of immateriality is simply not an issue. 62 So most recently J.M. Reese, Hellenistic Influence on the Book of Wisdom (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1970). 65 See Joseph Rcidcr, The Book of Wisdom (Dropsie College scries; New York: Harper and Brothers, 1957) 22-29. The main champion of the Hebrew original of Wisdom was D.S. Margoliouth, "Was the Book of Wisdom written in Hebrew?," Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (1890) 263-97. More recently others have maintained a Hebrew original for the first 10 chapters—so E.A. Speiser, "The Hebrew Origin of the First Part'of the Book of Wisdom," JQR 14(1923-24) 455-87, and C.E. Purinton, "Translation Greek in the Wisdom of Solomon," JBL 47(1928) 276-304.

characteristically Greek statements as that "the corruptible body weighs down the sour 5 (9:15), and we may suspect Greek influence of a Platonizing kind in the statement that "God created man for incorrupdon" (2:23). O n the other hand, we find the vindication of the just man expressed not merely as immortality of the soul but also as being "numbered among the sons of God" and having "a portion among the holy ones" (5:5), precisely the hope ofJewish apocalyptic eschatology in Daniel, Enoch and Qumran. 6 4 The Greek hope of immortality of the soul and the eschatology of the Jewish apocalypses was not precisely the same, but Wisdom shows how successfully the two could be combined. The similarity between certain patterns of Greek thought and apocalyptic eschatology might be explained in part by Hellenistic influence on Jewish thought in the intertestamental period. 65 The fact of Hellenistic influence or at least the influence of Hellenisticoriental syncretism can hardly be doubted. The spread of the belief in astral immortality in the Hellenistic world undoubtedly helped prepare the way for the idea of elevation to the heavenly host.66 There is no reason however to regard apocalyptic eschatology as a foreign growth in the Jewish tradition. The idea of a two-storey universe which made apocalyptic eschatology possible was always present to some degree in the biblical tradition and indeed in the ancient Near East as a whole. Recent studies have shown the importance of the divine council in the Old Testament. 67 The M

On the affinities between the Greek doctrine of immortality of the soul and the Jewish doctrine of elevation to the heavenly host see G.W. Nickelsburg, Resurrection, 177-180. O n the eschatology of the book of Wisdom see P. Grelot, "L'Eschatologie de la Sagesse et les Apocalypses juives,"in A. Barucq, ed., A La Rencontre de Dieu. Mémorial Albert Gelin (Le Puy: Mappus, 1961) 165-178; Paul Beauchamp, "Le salut corporel des justes et la conclusion du livre de la Sagesse," Bib 45 (1964) 491-526; C. Larcher, Études sur le Livre de la Sagesse (Paris: Gabalda, 1969)103-132, 301-328; M. Delcor, "L'immortalité de l'âme dans le livre de la Sagesse et dans les documents de Qumrân," Nouvelle Revue Théologique 77 (1955) 627630. For a possible reference to astral immortality in Wis 3:7f. see Nickelsburg, Resurrection, 60. 65 For alleged Greek influence on Jewish eschatology sec T.F. Glasson, Greek Influence on Jewish Eschatology (London: SPCK, 1961); Hcngcl, Judentum und Hellenismus, and H.D. Betz. "On the Problem of the Religio-historical Understanding of Apocalypticism," Journal for Theology and the Church 6 (1969) 134-156, argue for a more general Greek influence on Jewish apocalypticism. 66 O n astral immortality in the Hellenistic world see especially Franz Cumont, Lux Perpetua (Paris: Geuthner, 1949)142-188. 67 F.M. Cross, "The Council of Yahweh in Second Isaiah," JNES 12 (1953) 274278; R.N. Whybray, The Heavenly Counsellor in Is. 40:13-14 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971); R.E. Brown "The Pre-Christian Semitic Concept of Mystery," CBQ, 20 (1958) 417-420; H.W. Robinson, "The Council of Yahweh," JTS 45 (1944) 151-157.

prophets had access to this higher sphere as a source of information. 68 A few chosen individuals such as Enoch and Elijah seem to have gained permanent access to it. Furthermore the psalms and wisdom literature both speak of "life'5 in absolute terms which suggest a higher sphere of life, even though it is not specifically associated with the divine council.69 The great emphasis on "history" in modern biblical theology has often led to the impression that Israel had a one-dimensional, or nearly one-dimensional view of the world.70 This view must be modified. While Israel certainly had a distinctive world-view, and one in which emphasis on human history played an important part, there remain important analogies with Greek tradition in the concept of a higher realm of life.71 The affinities of late Jewish hope for the transcendence of death expressed in categories drawn from O T tradition, with the Platonic hope of the immortality of the soul expressed in terms drawn from Greek philosophy, go a long way to disprove the strong contrast between Greek and Hebrew thought advocated by some biblical theologians.72 b. The Logic of Apocalyptic Eschatology The apocalyptic writings had no one literally intended portrayal of the manner in which the elevation to the higher form of life will take place. Daniel speaks of a resurrection. Jubilees 23 says that the bodies of the just would remain in the earth but their spirits would rejoice. The Qumran community experienced the transition as a present reality, but also expected a future vindication which was variously described in the War Scroll, 11Q. Melchizedek, etc. This variety of 6,1

Cf. Jer 23:18, 22 where the false prophets are denounced because they had not stood in Yahweh's council. 69 For "life" used absolutely in the Wisdom literature, cf. Prov 2:19; 5:6; 6:23; 10:17-15:24, etc. On the eschatology of the Psalms see L. Sabourin, The Psalms (Staten Island, New York: Society of St. Paul, 1969) I, 145-151 and the literature there cited. The future hope of the apocalyptic writings may in a sense be considered as an insertion of the hope of "life" in the psalms and wisdom literature into the communal and political framework of the prophetic tradition. 70 Cf. the use made of biblical theology by Harvey Cox in The Secular City (New York: Macmillan, 1965) 15-32. 71 Cf. in this respect the article of N.P. Bratsiotis, "Ncphcsch-Psyche, Ein Beitrag zur Erforschung der Sprache und der Theologie der Septuaginta," Vetus Testamentum Supplements 15(1966) 58-89, especially his conclusion on p. 87. "Der hebraischc Terminus 'nephesch' und der sehr alte griechische Begriff 'psyche' weisen im grossen und ganzen diessclbc Breite der Bedeutung und dieselbe Mannigfaltigkeit in der Abwandlung ihrer Bedeutung auf." Bratsiotis is conccrncd here primarily with pre-Platonic Greek thought. 72 Sec especially Thorlief Boman, Hebrew Thought Compared with Greek (tr. Jules L. Moreau; London: S.C.M. Press, 1960). Contrast James Barr, The Semantics of Biblical

expression can hardly surprise us. Hope is by nature of things unseen, which can only be figuratively or symbolically expressed, and no one symbol can exhaust its potentialities. It is clear from the example of Qumran that the transition to the higher form of life was essentially a depth experience in the present. Death was transcended by an intensity in this life, which was not destroyed by physical decease, rather than by future revivification. In recent years certain theologians have pointed out that eschatological formulations are essentially projections of hopes experienced in the present. In that respect they indicate a present depthexperience, rather than an objective future expectation. So Rudolf Bultmann wrote: The meaning in history lies in the present and when the present is conceived as the eschatological present by Christian faith, the meaning in history is realized. 73

Also Karl Rahner: Man's knowledge of the future still to come, even his revealed knowledge, is confined to such prospects as can be derived from a reading of his present eschatological experience. 74

These assertions are in some degree supported by the evidence of Qumran or by the assertion in the Wisdom of Solomon that "Righteousness is eternal" (1:15). However, they can hardly be said to do justice to the logic of eschatology as found in the apocalyptic texts. In those texts, while the present experience of righteousness gives rise to the hope of final vindication, it is also true that the hope of final vindication confirms and even makes possible the present experience of righteousness and divine approval. Neither present experience nor future hope can be ignored. They are mutually interdependent. This interdependence is evident again and again in the apocalyptic texts. When, in Dan 12:12, the angel sums up the message of the preceding visions in the words "blessed are they who stand firm" he is encouraging the just to stand firm by the promise of resurrection which has been given at the beginning of the chapter, but also assuring them that even while they are standing firm they are blessed. Again in 1 Enoch 104:14 the righteous are told to "be hopeful and cast not away hope, for ye shall have great joy as the Language (Oxford: University Press, 1961). See the comments of Brevard S. Childs on the debate, Biblical Theology in Crisis (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1970) 44-47. 73 R. Bultmann, History and Eschatology (GifTord Lectures, 1955; New York: Harper and Row, 1957) 155. 74 K. Rahner, "The Hermeneutics of Eschatological Assertions" in Theological Investigations, 4 (London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1966) 334.

angels of heaven," "for the paths of righteousness are worthy of acceptation but the paths of unrighteousness will suddenly be destroyed and vanish" (94:1). Here again the point of the writer is that the paths of righteousness should be accepted here and now, but he realizes that this requires a degree of hopefulness and confidence in the future which is made possible by the promise of future joy. Even at Qumran, where the emphasis is very heavily on present experience there remains a promise of future consummation for God through the mysteries of His understanding and through His glorious wisdom has appointed a period for the existence of wrongdoing; but at the season of visitation He will destroy it forever; and then the truth of the world will appear forever (1QS 4:18-19).

The logic of these texts might be described as follows. The objective is that people should live justly, responding in a free and uninhibited manner to the demands of righteousness, and so attain the experience of the approval of God. Now one of the main factors which inhibits such a free response to righteousness is the fear of personal loss, of pursuing an unprofitable course of action, and especially of the ultimate loss of death. So the impious in the Wisdom of Solomon reason: Our life is a passing shadow And there is no retreat from our end... Come therefore let us enjoy the good things that are... Let us crown ourselves with rosebuds ere they wither... Let our strength be the rule of our righteousness, For weakness is proved to be unprofitable (Wis 2:5fl).

These fears are countered by the hope of a form of life which transcends death. This hope gives the freedom necessary to respond freely to the demands of righteousness and so attain the present depth-experience in life. This logic of Jewish apocalyptic eschatology carries over into the New Testament. It is well expressed in a passage in Romans 6:9ff: We know that Christ, once raised from the dead, is never to die again: he is no longer under the dominion of death. For in dying as he died he died to sin, once for all, and in living as he lives, he lives to God. In the same way you must regard yourselves as dead to sin and alive to God...Put yourselves at the disposal of God as dead men raised to life, yield your bodies to him as implements for doing right.

In this passage it is the assurance of resurrection which enables the Christian to give up his body to doing right with no interest other than living to God. The same point is made by the gospel saying: "Lay up for yourselves treasure in heaven"—not so that you may

eventually enjoy them, but so that they may mediate a present depth experience of eternal life— "for where your treasure is, there is your heart also" (Matt 6:19-21) . The important thing in this logic of eschatology is surely the attainment of the present depth experience, of liberation in response to the demands of righteousness. If this is attained, the manner in which it is mediated is of lesser importance. It is undoubtedly true that this depth experience can be attained by some without a belief in the heavenly host, immortality of the soul or resurrection of the body. It is also true that belief in an afterlife does not necessarily involve liberation, or the attainment of a depth-experience. However, if we are to understand the thought pattern of apocalyptic eschatology we must realize that, for the apocalypticists, present experience and future hope were intrinsically connected and mutually interdependent. 75 Conclusion This essay has been an attempt to clarify the distinctive nature of the future hope of late post-exilic Judaism. This hope cannot be understood as the expectation of a purely future event, and, despite the etymology of the word eschatology, it is not primarily concerned with the end of anything. Rather it is concerned with the transcendence of death by the attainment of a higher, angelic form of life. This hope shows considerable affinities with the Greek doctrines of the immortality of the soul. It cannot be adequately understood as either a future expectation or a present depth-experience. It is essentially an interpénétration of both.

75 Cf. Carl E. Braaten, History and Hermeneutics (New Directions in Theology Today 2; London: Lutterworth Press, 1968) 179: "The present without its past and future is fleeting and meaningless. Eschatology must point out the realm of future hope beyond death." Also Karl Rahner, "The Hermeneutics of Eschatological Assertions," in Theological Investigations, 4, 326: "The self-understanding of Scripture itself, no matter how existentially interpreted, undoubtedly excludes an elimination of eschatology."

C H A P T E R SIX

T H E K I N G D O M O F G O D IN T H E APOCRYPHA AND PSEUDEPIGRAPHA

Kingdom of God does not appear as a standard, fixed expression in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha as it does in the Gospels. There are however various motifs associated with "kingdom" which are important for establishing the possible range of meaning of the phrase. Daniel We begin our review with the canonical Book of Daniel, which is in fact a pseudepigraph in chs 7-12, and belongs chronologically with the Apocrypha. The tales in chs 1-6 are somewhat older than the apocalyptic visions of the Maccabean era, and, at least in some cases, are traditional stories which developed over a long period of time.1 T h e theme of world kingdoms runs throughout these stories as they trace the career of Daniel under Babylonian, Median, and finally Persian rule. The inclusion of Darius the Mede in this sequence is a notorious problem, since Babylon was never ruled by Media, and Darius was the name of a later, Persian king. The solution of the problem lies in the discovery that Daniel was adapting a scheme which was conventional in Near Eastern political propaganda. According to this schema there would be a sequence of four world kingdoms followed by a fifth, final one. 2 The schema is known from a Roman chronicler, Aemilius Sura, who wrote about 175 BCE. Aemilius lists the kingdoms as Assyria, Media, Persia, and Macedonia, followed by Rome. The same kingdoms are listed in the Fourth Sibylline Oracle, a Jewish work from the late first century CE,

1 J.J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Daniel (Harvard Semitic Monographs 16; Missoula: Scholars, 1977) 8-11. The tradition-historical background has been most vividly illustrated in the case of Dan 4 by the discovery of the Prayer of Nabonidus at Qpmran. 2 T h e existence of this schema was pointed out by J.W. Swain, "The Theory of the Four Monarchies: Opposition History Under the Roman Empire," Classical Philology 35 (1940) 1-21. The most complete discussion is by David Russer, "The Four Empires in the Fourth Sibyl and in the Book of Daniel," Israel Oriental Studies 2 (1972) 148-75.

which may, however, incorporate an older source. 3 Because of the inclusion of Media, the schema is thought to have originated in Persia. Originally, the schema served as propaganda against the Greek empire of Alexander. The implication was that history had run its course and that the fourth, Greek, kingdom would soon be overthrown. The schema of the four kingdoms is found explicitly in Dan 2 in the interpretation of Nebuchadnezzar's dream, and again in ch 7. It also informs the structure of the book as a whole. Chapters 1-6 mention Babylonian, Median, and Persian kings. Chapters 7-12 repeat this sequence and anticipate the coming of "the prince of Greece" (10:20). It is apparent then that Daniel identifies the kingdoms as Babylon, Media, Persia, and Greece—Babylon is substituted for Assyria because of its role in the destruction of Jerusalem. In Nebuchadnezzar's dream in Dan 2 the four world kingdoms are symbolized as a statue, made of metals of declining value, which is destroyed by a stone that then becomes a great mountain. 4 Daniel explains that in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed, nor shall its sovereignty be left to another people. It shall break in pieces all these kingdoms and bring them to an end, and it shall stand forever (2:44).

This kingdom set up by God is not further described. From the context we should suppose that it is a Jewish kingdom which will rise to replace, and destroy, the previous gentile kingdoms. It differs from other kingdoms insofar as it will not pass away, but it is presumably a political, earthly kingdom like them. 5 The kingdom set up by God must, however, be distinguished from the kingdom, or kingship, of God. In Dan 3:33 Nebuchadnezzar praises God: "His kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and his dominion is from generation to generation." Here again there is a contrast between the transience of human kingdoms, even that of the mighty Nebuchadnezzar, and the permanence of God's reign. The kingdom of God here is not an earthly kingdom set up by God, but the power by which "the Most High rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will" (Dan 4:29). In these hymnic passages 3

J.J. Collins, "The Sibylline Oracles," J H. Charlesworth, ed., The Old Testament Pesudepigrapha (2 vols; Garden City, New York: Doublcday, 1983) 1:381-89. 4 On the symbolism of the dream sec Collins, The Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Daniel, 34-46. 5 It is possible that Daniel was adapting a Babylonian prophecy which predicted a lasting Babylonian kingdom. Sec Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination (New York: Crossroad, 1984) 76-77 and compare the Babylonian Uruk prophecy.

Daniel draws on the biblical tradition where Yahweh is proclaimed king in the Psalms. The four-kingdom schema is taken up again in Dan 7 in the context of an apocalyptic vision from the time of the persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes. In this case the four kingdoms are represented as beasts rising from the sea. T h e dominant imagery of the passage is drawn from the myth of combat between a god and a sea monster or dragon, which Israel had adapted from the more ancient Near Eastern cultures. 6 God, the ancient of days, is depicted as a royal judge who confers "dominion and glory and kingdom 5 ' on "one like a son of m a n " (7:13-14). Subsequendy we are told that "the holy ones of the Most High shall receive the kingdom, and possess the kingdom for ever" (7:18) and finally that the kingdom and the dominion and the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven shall be given to the people of the holy ones of the Most High: their kingdom shall be an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey them (7:27).

T h e interpretation of this chapter, which has had such profound influence on the Gospels, remains very controversial. There is evidendy a contrast between the everlasting kingdom conferred by God and the transient human kingdoms which precede it, as in Dan 2. Further, it is clear that an earthly Jewish kingdom is envisaged, which will be worldwide and everlasting (7:27). The controversy concerns the interpretation of the "one like a son of man" and the "holy ones of the Most High." Some scholars take these expressions simply as ways of referring to the Jewish people. 7 Against this, however, is the fact that every undisputed mention of "holy ones" in Daniel refers to angels, 8 and that figures who appear in human likeness are also angels.9 If Dan 7 is read in the context of chs 10-12, it is clear that Daniel envisaged two dimensions in history. The conflict on earth between Jews and Greeks is only the reflection of the batde between their angelic patrons. T h e victory of the Jews corresponds to, and depends 6 Collins, The Apocalyptic Vmon of the Book of Daniel, 95-101; The Apocalyptic Imagination, 79-80. For the background myth see John Day, God's Conflict with the Dragon and the Sea (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1985) and Adela Yarbro Coffins, The Combat Myth in the Book of Revelation (Harvard Dissertations in Religion 9; Missoula: Scholars, 1976) 57-100. ‫ י‬So, recendy, L.F. Hartman and A.A. DiLella, The Book of Daniel (AB 23; Garden City: Doubleday, 1978) 85-102; M. Casey, Son of Man: The Interpretation and Influence of Daniel 7 (London: SPCK, 1979) 7-50; W.S. Towner, Daniel (Interpretation; Adanta:John Knox, 1984) 105-6. 8 Dan 4:10, 14, 20; 8:13. Cf. the angelic "holy ones" in / Enoch 14:22-23. 9 Dan 8:15-16; 9:21; 10:5, 16, 18; 12:6-7. Cf. the Animal Apocalypse in I Enoch 8390 where men represent angels, or humans transformed to an angelic state.

on the victory of the archangel Michael. Accordingly it seems most probable that the "one like a son of man" is Michael, who represents Israel on the heavenly level. The "holy ones" are the angelic host and "the people of the holy ones" are the Jews. 10 The kingdom then is realized on two levels and involves simultaneously an angelic kingdom and the earthly dominion of the Jewish people. A precise parallel to this idea is found in the Qumran War Scroll, where God is said to "raise up the rule of Michael in the midst of the gods and the realm of Israel in the midst of all flesh" (1QM 17:7)." The apocalyptic kingdom of Dan 7 is not simply identical with that envisaged in Dan 2 but involves an otherworldly dimension. Dan 12 promises that the faithful Jews can share in this dimension by resurrection, and that the wise teachers will shine like the stars forever and ever, which in apocalyptic idiom, means to join the fellowship of the angels.12 The everlasting kingdom thus becomes accessible not only to future generations but also to the righteous after death. On the basis of our examination of Daniel, then, we can distinguish three aspects of the kingdom motif. First, there is the hymnic use for the sovereignty of God, by which he disposes of all kingdoms. Second, there is the earthly dominion of the Jewish people, which is a kingdom set up by God. Finally, there is the apocalyptic kingdom of the angels, which involves the exaltation of righteous human beings after death. These three ideas are not mutually exclusive. All three are implied in the apocalyptic vision in Dan 7. The Sibylline Tradition The theme of world kingdoms plays a major role in the Sibylline Oracles from the Jewish Diaspora. The main body of Sib O r 3 was composed in Egypt around the middle of the second century BCE. 1 3 Sib O r 3:97-161 introduces the theme of kingship and shows that it was a cause of strife from the beginning. The section concludes with a list of world kingdoms in 3:156-61. The other main sections of the 10

Collins, The Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Darnel, 123-47; The Apocalyptic Imagination, 78-85. Cf. A. Lacocque: The Book of Daniel (Atlanta: Knox, 1979) 131-34; C. Rowland, The Open Heaven (New York: Crossroad, 1983) 178-83; Day, God's Conflict with the Dragon and the Sea, 167-78. " U.B. Müller, Messias and Menschensohn in jüdischen Apokalypsen und in der Offenbarung Johannes (Gütersloh: Mohn, 1972) 28. 12 Cf. 1 Enoch 102:2, 6. 13 J J . Collins, The Sibylline Oracles of Egyptian Judaism (SBLDS 13; Missoula: Scholars Press, 1974) 24-37; "Sibylline Oracles," OTP 1:354-61.

original corpus follow a pattern of sin, followed by tribulation, followed by the advent of a king or kingdom. In Sib O r 3:196-294 this pattern is demonstrated from Jewish history at the time of the Babylonian exile. T h e exile comes to an end when God sends a king (286), who must be identified in this context as Cyrus of Persia.14 In other passages the focus of the sibyl is on Hellenistic Egypt. In Sib O r 3:192-93 the time of deliverance will come in "the seventh reign, when a king of Egypt, who will be of the Greeks by race, will rule." T h e king in question is either Ptolemy VI Philometor (if Alexander is counted as the first) or his anticipated successor. Similar references to the seventh king are found in Sib O r 3:318 and 608. In Sib O r 3:652 "God will send a king from the sun, who will stop the entire earth from evil war." T h e reference again is to a Ptolemaic king.15 The sibyl looked for a king from the Ptolemaic line who would mediate deliverance for the Jews as Cyrus of Persia had done at the end of the Babylonian exile. In the final section of the book the sibyl speaks of a kingdom which will be raised up by God (767-795). The temple will be a center of pilgrimage for all nations; wolves and lambs will feed together, as envisaged in Isa 11. This eschatological kingdom is apparendy distinct from the reign of the seventh, Ptolemaic king, but it is also an earthly kingdom, which will bring to an end the sequence of world kingdoms. Throughout Sib O r 3 God is "the great King" (499, 560, 616, 784, 808) who must be worshipped by all. As in Dan 1-6 the kingship of God is his sovereignty by which he disposes of all kingdoms. The Sibylline tradition is continued in additions which were made to Sib O r 3 in the first century BCE. One of these oracles (3:46-62) anticipates that after the Roman conquest of Egypt (31 BCE) "the most great kingdom of the immortal king will become manifest over men" (Sib O r 3:47-48). This will be a universal kingdom ruled by a "holy prince.' ‫ י‬This figure is not identified as a Roman or Egyptian leader and may be a Jewish messiah. The advent of the "kingdom of God" here is understood primarily as the occasion for "the judgment of the great king, immortal God" (3:56), executed by means of a fiery cataract from heaven. A similar expectation of destructive judgment pervades the fifth 14 Contra J . Nolland, "Sib O r II1. 265-94. An Early Maccabean Messianic Oracle," JTS 30 (1979) 158-67, who finds a typological allusion to a Davidic messiah here. 15 Collins, The Sibylline Oracles of Egyptian Judaism, 40-44. The Egyptian background of the phrase "king from the sun" is shown by its occurrence in the Potter's Oracle, col. 3.

book of Sibylline Oracles, composed in Egypt on the eve of the great Diaspora revolt of 115 CE.16 In V 108 the judgment is brought about by "a certain king sent from God," about whom we are told no more. Elsewhere in Sib Or 5 the savior figure is said to come from heaven. The most explicit passage is found in w 414-28: For a blessed man came from the expanses of heaven with a scepter in his hands which God gave him and he gained sway over all things well, and gave back the wealth to all the good, which previous men had taken.

He is also said to refashion "the city which God desired" by building a tower which touches the clouds, (cf. Sib O r 5:252, where the wall of Jerusalem is said to extend as far as Joppa). Despite the heavenly origin of the savior king, Sib O r 5 remains true to the Sibylline tradition. God himself is the king (5:499) who must be worshipped by all. His kingdom on earth is an eschatological kingdom centered in Jerusalem but universal in scope. The Egyptian Sibylline tradition is remarkable for its lack of the otherworldly dimension so characteristic of the apocalyptic literature. There is no talk of angels and no expectation of resurrection. The hope is the traditional Israelite hope for the transformation of the earth. The fourth book of Sibylline Oracles, which, in its present form comes from Syria or the Jordan valley (ca. 80 CE), shows more affinity with apocalyptic eschatology.17 Here again the sequence of world kingdoms provides the context for the eschatological expectation. The sibyl, like Daniel, speaks of a sequence of four kingdoms, over ten generations, ruled in turn by Assyria (six generations), Media (two generations), Persia and Macedonia (one each). The rise of Rome follows. Since Rome is not integrated into the numerical sequence, it appears to have been added to update an older oracle. The final demise of the world kingdoms does not lead to a final "kingdom of God" in Sib Or 4. Instead, God will "burn the whole earth and destroy the whole race of men" (Sib O r 4:176). This universal destruction is then followed by a resurrection and final judgment. The resurrection is a restoration on earth: those who are pious "will live on earth again" (187). This final state is not called a kingdom in Sib O r 4, but it takes the place of the world kingdoms. 16 Collins, The Sibylline Oracles of Egyptian Judaism, 73-95; "Sibylline Oracles," 1:390-2. O n the historical setting see also M. Hengel, "Messianischc Hoffnung und politischer 'Radikalismus' in der jüdisch-hellenistischcn Diaspora," in D. Hellholm, ed., Apocalyptyicvm in the Mediterranean World and the Near East (Tübingen: Mohr, 1983) 653-84. » Collins, "Sibylline Oracles," OTP 1:381-83.

Other Diaspora Usage The Sibylline Oracles, with their focus on the succession of world empires, are an important, but somewhat atypical, strand of Diaspora Judaism. 18 The idea of the sovereignty of God is the common denominator of all references to the kingdom, including those of the Sibyllines. This idea did not necessarily entail the expectation of an eschatological kingdom. 19 For 2 Maccabees, God is the "King of Kings" who controls the course of history (13:4). The revolt ofJason, the Hellenizer, is a revolt against "the holy land and the kingdom" (1:7). Kingdom here can only mean the sovereignty of God, perhaps as expressed through the law.20 The second letter prefixed to 2 Macc declares that God "has saved all his people, and has returned the inheritance to all, and the kingship and priesthood and consecration" (2:17). Whether the "kingship" here refers to the Hasmonean dynasty 21 or whether it is meant as equivalent to consecration in a spiritual sense, it is certainly conceived as present after the re-consecration of the temple. In the philosophical circles of Diaspora Judaism the "kingdom" took on a more spiritual, or ethical sense. The Wisdom of Solomon declares that "there is no dominion (basileion) of Hades on earth, for righteousness is immortal" (1:14-15). Even though the righteous "seemed to have died" (3:2), they will judge nations and rule over peoples and the Lord will reign over them forever (3:8). Here the kingdom is something that the righteous enjoy after death: "But the righteous live forever, and their reward is with the Lord...therefore they will receive majestic royalty" (5:16). In this sense we can understand how "the desire for wisdom leads to a kingdom" (6:20). Finally we are told that wisdom guided the righteous man and "showed him the kingdom of God and gave him knowledge of angels" (10:10). T h e reference is to Jacob. The apparent equation of 18

For a survey of Jewish Hellenistic literature apart from Pliilo see J . J. Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem. Jewish Identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora (New York: Crossroad, 1983). 19 The most complete survey of references to the kingdom of God and related concepts in the "intertestamental" literature is that of Odo Camponovo, Königtum, Königsherrschafl und Reich Gottes in den Jriihjiidischen Schriften (OBO 58; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1984). See also M. Lattke, "On the Jewish Background of the Synopric Concept 'The Kingdom of God,"' in B. Chilton, ed., The Kingdom of God (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984) 72-91. 20 So Componovo, Königtum, 187. 21 So J.A. Goldstein, "How the Authors in I and II Maccabees treated the "Messianic Prophecies," i n j . Neusner et al., ed., Judaisms and Their Messiahs (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987) 83-84.

the "kingdom of God" with the world of the angels is reminiscent of Daniel, and indeed the Wisdom of Solomon is influenced at many points by apocalyptic traditions. 22 It does not, however, retain the expectation of a kingdom on earth, and there is a tendency to identify the kingdom with wisdom and righteousness which are the root of immortality (Wis 15:3). Other writings of the Diaspora go further in spiritualizing the "kingdom." 23 For 4 Macc 2:23 the mind which follows the law will rule a kingdom characterized by the four cardinal virtues. The idea found in Stoicism that the wise man is a king is also in Philo (e.g. Migr Abr 197; Abr 261; De Somniis (2:244). For Philo, kingdom (basileia) is the rule of the wise man, and it is established by God (Abr 261). "Kingdom" (basileia) can even be defined as wisdom (Migr Abr 197) or as virtue (De Somniis 2:244). The Apocalyptic Kingdom The apocalyptic idea of the kingdom, developed in Dan 7-12, figures more prominently in the Judaism of the land of Israel, although even there it is not as prevalent as we might expect. The kingdom is not a prominent motif in the early Enoch literature. 24 In the Book of the Watchers (1 Enoch 1-36) God is called the eternal king (9:4; 12:3; 25:35,7; 27:3). When he "comes down to visit the earth for good" (25:3) his throne will be established on a mountain. Then "the chosen" will receive life from the fruit of a tree, "and they will live a long life on earth, as your (Enoch's) fathers lived, and in their days sorrow and pain and toil and punishment will not touch them" (25:6). The reign of God, then, will finally involve a return to a paradisiac state. In view of ch 22 we must assume that the spirits of the dead can also participate in this state, even though it is located on earth. However, the Book of the Watchers does not refer to this eschatological state as "the kingdom of God." God is king of all eternity. Again in the Book of Dreams (1 Enoch 83-90), God is hailed by prayer as "Lord King, great and powerful in your majesty, Lord of the whole creation of heaven, King of Kings and God of the whole world" (84:2). In the Animal Apocalypse (1 Enoch 90:20) the Lord takes 22 G.W. Nickelsburg, Resurrection, Immortality and Eternal Life in Intertestamental Judaism (Cambridge: Harvard, 1972) 68-82; J . J . Collins, "Cosmos and Salvation. Jewish Wisdom and Apocalyptic in the Hellenistic Age." History of Religions 17 (1977) 121-42. 23 K.L. Schmidt, basileia (tou theou) in Hellenistic Judaism," 7ZWT(1964) 1:57424

Camponovo, Königtum, 257.

his seat for judgment on a throne "in the pleasant land" (Israel). The transformation that follows the judgment is again located on earth, although it apparendy involves a resurrection of the dead. In the Apocalypse of Weeks (1 Enoch 93:1-10; 91:11-17) both the historical temple and the eschatological one are associated with the kingship of God. T h e final consummation is an exercise of divine sovereignty, but it cannot be equated with the kingdom of God. The Enochic writing which bears closest resemblance to Daniel is the Book of Similitudes (1 Enoch 37-71), a document of disputed date which most probably comes from around the time of Christ. 25 The expression "kingdom of God" is not used, and God is called king in only one passage (1 Enoch 63:2-4). However, the theme of kingship is more important than a purely terminological inquiry might suggest. At the center of the Similitudes are God, the "Lord of Spirits5' or "Head of Days,55 and the exalted angelic figure called "that Son of Man.5526 T h e main function of the Son of Man figure is to judge and destroy the kings and the powerful. And this Son of Man whom you have seen will rouse the kings and the powerful from their resting places, and the strong from their thrones, and will loose the reins of the strong.. .and he will cast down kings from their thrones and from their kingdoms (/ Enoch 46:4-5).

The Lord of Spirits is ultimately the one "who is king over all kings55 (63:4, cf. Dan 4:29), but he sets the Son of Man on his throne of glory (61:8; 62:5) to function as royal judge. The Similitudes do not speak of an earthly kingdom to replace that of "the kings of the mighty.55 T h e emphasis is rather on the resting places of the righteous with the angels and holy ones (39:5; cf. 51:4). The kingship of God is viewed primarily in its negative aspect, in the destruction of the kings of the earth. T h e Son of Man is also called "messiah 5 ' (48:10; 52:4) and takes over traditional kingly functions, 27 but his kingdom has an otherworldly character. The Testament of Moses Perhaps the clearest example of an "apocalyptic55 kingdom of God is found in the Testament of Moses, which is not formally an apocalypse, but is closely related to the "historical" apocalypses in form and

25 D.W. Suter, Tradition and Composition in the Parables of Enoch (SBLDS 47; Missoula: Scholars Press, 1979) 11-38. 26 See Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, 142-54. 27 J . Theisohn, Der auserwählte Richter (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1975) 98-99.

theme. In its present form the Testament dates from about the turn of the eras. It is probable, however, that the original document dates from the Maccabean period. 28 The redacted Testament is one of the few compositions that can be dated with confidence to the first half of the first century CE, and so it is of considerable interest for the context in which Jesus lived. The Testament of Moses reviews the history of Israel so as to demonstrate a pattern of sin and punishment. In ch 8: there will come upon them punishment and wrath such as has never happened to them from the creation till that time.

The punishment in question looks very much like the persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes. The Testament goes on to tell of a man named Taxo who takes his seven sons and resolves to fast for three days, go into a cave in the open country and die rather than transgress the commandments, "for if we do this and do die, our blood will be avenged before the Lord" (9:7). There follows directly the announcement that "then his kingdom will appear throughout his whole creation" (10:1). The manifestation of the kingdom will be the vengeance of God on his enemies, through the hands of an angel. Israel will be raised up to the heaven of the stars and see her enemies from on high. As in Daniel and the Similitudes of Enoch, the kingdom here has a strongly destructive aspect. The statement in 10:8 that Israel will mount up above the necks and wings of the eagle breaks the metrical pattern, and so can be shown to involve a redactional change from the Roman period, when the eagle symbolized Rome. 29 The Testament does not speak of a Jewish kingdom to replace the Roman. The exaltation to the stars (10:9) should probably be understood, by analogy with Dan 12, to imply immortality. Otherwise we are given no positive description of the kingdom. Perhaps the most important point to note is that the kingdom is ushered in with no human agency. The contribution of the human Taxo is to purify himself and die—a course of action very similar to the maskîlîm, or wise teachers in Dan 11. In the Testament, as in Daniel and the Similitudes of Enoch, the kingdom of God is brought about by the transcendent power of 2 " For the debate on the provenance of the Testament see the essays, in G. W. Nickelsburg, ed., Studies on the Testament of Moses ( Missoula: Scholars Press, 1973). For its relation to the apocalypses see Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, 102-6. 29 Adela Yarbro Collins, "Composition and Redaction of the Testament of Moses 10," HTR 69 (1976) 179-86. Cf. the incident in 4 BCE when two doctors of the law incited some youths to pull down the golden eagle from the temple (Josephus, JW 1.33.2-4 [648-55]; Λη/ 17.6.2-3 [149-63]).

God and his angels. It is not to be attained by human revolution and does not even involve the earthly career of a messiah. The Psalms of Solomon Messianic expectations did persist throughout this period, however. 30 Apart from the Qumran scrolls, the major witness is found in the Psalms of Solomon, from the mid-first century BCE These Psalms were written after the violation of Jerusalem by Pompey in 63 BCE The Psalmist takes the subsequent death of Pompey in Egypt as evidence "that it is God who is great, powerful in his great strength. He is king over the heavens, judging even kings and rulers" (Pss Sol 2:2930). As in Dan 4, God is the king who disposes of all kingdoms. The Psalms' theology of kingship is most fully laid out in Pss Sol 17. After an initial declaration that "you, Lord, are our king forevermore" (v 1) and that "the kingdom of our God is forever over the nations in judgment 1 ' (v 3), the psalm recalls how God chose David as king. "Those to whom you did not make the promise" (the Hasmoneans) set up a kingdom because of their arrogance, and provoked the punishment of God through the hand of the lawless one (Pompey). Now the psalmist prays, "See, Lord, and raise up for them their king, the son of David, to rule over your servant Israel" (Pss Sol 17:21). The kingdom ruled by this messiah is essentially the restoration of a national Jewish kingdom. He will "purge Jerusalem from gentiles" (17:22); and "he will have gentile nations serving him under his yoke" (v 30); and "there will be no unrighteousness among them in his days, for all shall be holy, and their king shall be the Lord Messiah (v 32).31 The Psalms of Solomon show the influence of apocalypticism in one important respect: the belief that "those who fear the Lord shall rise up to eternal life" (3:12; cf. 13:11 ; 14:3; 15:13). The dominant emphasis, however, is on the restoration of a national kingdom where the kingship of God is mediated by a Davidic messiah. The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs Messianic expression about the turn of the era is not well documented, apart from the Dead Sea Scrolls. That is due, at least in 30

J.H. Charlesworth, "The Concept of the Messiah in the Pseudepigrapha," ANRW 2.19 (ed. W. H. Haase; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1979) 188-218. 31 See further Camponovo, Königtum, 200-228; G. Davenport, "The 'Anointed of the Lord' in Psalms of Solomon 17," in G.W. Nickelsburg and J.J. Collins, ed., Ideal Figures in Ancient Judaism (Missoula: Scholars Press, 1980) 67-92.

part, to the limitation of our sources. The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs are widely believed to preserve Jewish material from the second century BCE forward. Perhaps the most notable of these traditions is the association of the messiah with both Levi and Judah. In the present form of the Testaments, one messiah, Christ, is both priest and king, but it is very probable that the earlier tradition envisaged a dual messiahship as we also find at Qumran. According to Test Dan 13:10-13, salvation will arise from Levi and Judah and defeat Beliar. Then the souls of the saints will rest in Eden and rejoice in the new Jerusalem and "the Holy One of Israel will reign over them. 5 ' The kingdom of God here has a distinctly apocalyptic character insofar as it involves victory over Beliar, resurrection, and a new, rather than restored, Jerusalem. It is also Christian in its present form. Unfortunately, the Testaments do not provide independent evidence of Jewish beliefs but need corroboration from other sources.32 Messianic Movements in the First Century We know from Josephus that there were messianic movements in the first century CE which did not leave written records of their ideology.33 A number of these movements developed after the death of Herod, led by such figures as Judas of Galilee, Simon, a servant of Herod, and Athronges, a shepherd. 34 At the time of the first Jewish revolt against Rome further messianic pretenders appeared— Menahem, son of Judas, and most notably Simon Bar Giora. 35 In the early second century the great Diaspora revolt centered on the messianic figure Andreas (Lukuas) and of course Bar Kochba was also a messianic figure. In all of these cases the messianic movements were actively and violently revolutionary, and the objective was to replace Roman rule with a native Jewish kingdom. Josephus distinguishes these violent revolutionaries from

32

For an overview of the debate about the Testaments see J J . Collins, "Testaments," in M.E. Stone, ed., Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984) 325-44; "The Testamentary Literature in Recent Scholarship," in G.W. Nickelsburg and R.A. Kraft, ed., Early Judaism and its Modern Interpreters (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986) 268-78. 33 The best account of these movements can be found in R.A. Horsley and J . Hanson, Bandits, Prophets and Messiahs (Minneapolis: Winston/Seabury, 1986) ch 3. 34 Judas: Ant 17.10.5. (271-72); Simon: Ant 17.10.6 (273-76); Athronges: Ant 17.10.7 (278-85). 35 Menahem: JW 2.17.8-9 (433-48). On the mcssianic character of Simon see Horsley and Hanson, Bandits, 120-27.

another group of scoundrels, in act less criminal but in intention more evil...Cheats and deceivers, claiming inspiration, they schemed to bring about revolutionary changes by inducing the mob to act as if possessed and by leading them out into the wild country on the pretence that there God would give them signs of approaching freedom. 36

The best known examples of this type, Theudas and the Egyptian, 37 did not claim to be messiahs and are not said by Josephus to have spoken of a kingdom; but, we simply do not know how they conceived their actions. They bear enough similarity to Taxo in the Testament of Moses to merit mention here. 38 Messianism in the Apocalypses Messianic expectations were integrated into an apocalyptic schema in the great apocalypses from the end of the first century CE, 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch.39 Fourth Ezra draws on the four-kingdom schema of Daniel in the vision of the lion and the eagle in chs 11-12. The eagle symbolizes Rome, "the fourth kingdom which appeared in a vision to your brother Daniel'' (12:11). The lion is "the Messiah whom the Most High has kept until the end of days, who will arise from the posterity of David" (12:32). The function of this messiah is to rebuke and destroy the nations, especially Rome, and to deliver "the remnant of my people" (12:34). In 4 Ezra 13, the messiah, identified as "he whom the Most High has been keeping for many ages" (12:26) and "my son" (13:32, 37) rises from the sea on a cloud. He destroys the nations with the breath of his mouth and gathers the lost tribes of Israel. According to 4 Ezra 7:28-30 the messiah will reign on earth for 400 years, and then die. There will follow seven days of primeval silence, a new creation, and the resurrection of the dead. The traditional hope for a messianic kingdom is thus given a place in the schema, but it is not the ultimate focus of hope. Second Baruch operates with a similar schema. Here again we find the four-kingdom sequence, in ch 39. The messiah will uproot the fourth kingdom, and "his dominion will last forever until the world 36

JW 2.13.4 (258-60). Theudas: Ant 20.5.1 (97-99); Acts 5:36. The Egyptian: JW 2.13.5 (261-63); Acts 21:38. 38 On the relevance of these figures to discussions of "the kingdom" see E.P. Sanders, Jesus and Judaism (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985) 138. 39 See M. E. Stone, "The Concept of the Messiah in II Ezra," J . Neusner, ed., Religions in Antiquity, Essays in Memory of E.R. Goodenough (Leiden: Brill, 1968) 295-312; Müller, Messias und Menschensohn, 83-154. 37

of corruption has ended and until the times which have been mentioned before have heen fulfilled" (40:3). His reign is nonetheless temporary. The description of his reign in ch 29 is followed by the prediction that it will happen after these things when the time of the appearance of the Anointed One has been fulfilled and he returns with glory, that then all who sleep in hope of him will rise (30:1-2).

The reign of the messiah marks the end of gentile dominion and brings about the transformation of the earth (cf. chs 72-74), but again the focus of the apocalyptic hope lies beyond the messianic reign in the new age of the resurrection. Neither 2 Baruch nor 4 Ezra uses the expression "kingdom of God" for the messianic age, but their conceptions are evidently of relevance here, especially in view of their use of the four kingdom schema. The Targums to the Prophets T h e Targumic and Rabbinic literature lie outside the scope of this survey. Yet the Targum Jonathan to the Prophets requires some comment, since a number of recent studies have argued that its "kingdom theology may represent first century thinking." 40 The difficulty of dating the Targumic material is notorious. At most, particular exegetical traditions can be shown to be early by comparison with other, dateable material. 41 The motif of the "kingdom of God" has attracted attention because the phrase is used in a set, standard way, as it also is in Gospels, but not in the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, and because the Targumic use of the phrase contrasts with the Rabbinic use of "the kingdom of heaven" for the rule of the law. In the Targum of Isaiah the phrase "kingdom of God" or "kingdom of the Lord" is used in place of a reference to God himself: e.g. at Isa 24:23 the M T "because the Lord of hosts will reign on Mt. Zion" is rendered "because the kingdom of the Lord of hosts will be revealed on Mt. Zion." 42 We should not conclude that the kingdom

40 B. Chilton, The Kingdom of God, 22. Sec also his The Glory of Israel, The Theology and Provenance of the Isaiah Targum (Sheffield: J S O T , 1982). The relevance of the Targums for the teaching of Jesus is also urged by Klaus Koch, "Offenbaren wird sich das Reich Gottes." NTS 25(1979)158-65. 41 See Chilton, The Glory of Israel, 4-12. 42 The references to the kingdom of God, or of the Lord, are laid out clcarly by Camponovo, Königtum, 419-28.

is simply a periphrasis for God himself.43 The phrase is used in contexts where the M T is already eschatological. The characteristic Targumic phrase "the kingdom of the Lord will be revealed" puts the emphasis on the expectation of an eschatological event. The idea of the "revelation" of the kingdom has its closest parallel in Test Moses 10:1, and the very fact that it is revealed gives it an "apocalyptic 5 ' character. Yet the Targum does not show the interest in an angelic transcendent world, characteristic of Daniel or the Similitudes of Enoch. Rather, the kingdom is associated with Mt. Zion. 44 The Targum shows a developed interest in the Davidic messiah, and also associates him with Zion (Targum Isaiah 16:1, 5).45 In general the eschatology of the Targum looks for a Jewish restoration, but it also includes the resurrection of the dead (Targum Isaiah 26:19). In all of this the "kingdom theology" of the Targum may be compatible with that of the Psalms of Solomon or perhaps (but less clearly) of 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch. As in all of this literature there is a sharp antithesis between the fate of Jerusalem and that of Rome (e.g. Targum Isaiah 54:1). The kingdom of God is, of course, based on the idea of divine sovereignty, but it would seem to imply the expectation of an earthly kingdom too. Klaus Koch is probably right when he concludes: the kingdom of God, the kingdom of the messiah and the dominion of Israel (over the nations) belong together for the Targum. 46

Conclusion We have seen that the motif of the kingdom of God was a complex one in Judaism in the period 200 BCE-100 CE The basic underlying « So Chilton, The Glory of Israel, 77. Cf. his article "Regnum Dei Deus Est." SJT 31 (1978) 261-70. He qualifies the identification however by saying that the periphrasis is "employed in respect of divine and saving revelation, particularly on Mt. Zion." Cf. his clarification of his view in The Kingdom of God, 23: "I have suggested that the future oriented eschatological aspect of the kingdom is to be acknowledged, but that it stems from Jesus' view of God, and not from a particular expectation of the future." 44 Chilton (The Glory of Israel, 78) finds a discrepancy between an exclusively Zion-associated kingdom in Targum Isaiah and a more universal one in Targum Zechariah, but the biblical Isaiah already conceives of a universal kingdom centered on Zion. 45 The references to the messiah in the Isaiah Targum are collected by Chilton, The Glory of Israel, 86-96. In an appendix, 112-17, he concludes that "the other Latter Prophets Targums appear to reflect messianic teaching consistent with that represented in the Isaiah Targum, but not so fully," and that the Jeremiah and Ezekiel targum are closest to that of Isaiah. In Targum Micah 4:7-8 the revelation of the kingdom is explicidy associated with the messiah. 46 Koch, "Offenbaren," 164.

idea of all conceptions of the kingdom was that God is king of the universe, past, present, and future. In some contexts the kingdom could be understood in a moral or spiritual way, especially in the Hellenistic Diaspora. In the great majority of cases, however, especially in the land of Israel, in the first centuries BCE and CE, it was expected that the "kingship" of God would be manifested in an eschatological kingdom. The eschatological kingdom could still be conceived in various ways. We may contrast the apocalyptic kingdom of Dan 7-12 or Test Moses 10, which would be brought about by angels, with the more traditional messianic kingdom of Pss Sol 17. These two types however do not remain pure and separate:47 in 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch the messianic kingdom is accommodated as a transitory stage within an apocalyptic framework. Even the earthly kingdom of the Psalms of Solomon involved the resurrection of the dead, but this belief was not taken up in the Sibylline Oracles of Egyptian Judaism (i.e. Sib Or 3 and 5). Finally we lack direct information about the ideology of the various messianic and prophetic movements mentioned by Josephus, which left no records of their own, but which apparently aimed at the restoration of the Jewish nation. The common denominator of all eschatological formulations of the kingdom, however, in addition to the postulate of divine sovereignty, was rejection of foreign rule. The implementation of the kingdom of God, whether by a messiah or a direct heavenly intervention, implied the destruction of the kings and the mighty of this world. The material we have reviewed here illustrates the associations which would have been attached to the proclamation of the kingdom of God in the first century. It is of course possible that Jesus departed radically from these ways of understanding the kingdom, but at the very least they provide the context within which his proclamation would have been understood.

47 Cf. the classic typology of Jewish eschatology proposed by Sigmund Mowinckel, He That Cometh (Nashville: Abingdon, 1955) 281.

CHAPTER SEVEN

T H E CHRISTIAN APPROPRIATION O F T H E APOCALYPTIC T R A D I T I O N

The genre of literature that we call apocalyptic takes its name from the Apocalypse of John. 1 Historically, however, the genre had been developed over two and a half centuries in Judaism before John had his visions on Patmos. No other book in the New Testament has such clear and well-established precedents in Jewish literature. This fact has been a source of scandal for some Christian theologians. Martin Luther, who compared the book to the Jewish apocalypse of Fourth Ezra, found it neither prophetic nor apostolic, and denied that it either taught or recognized Christ. 2 For Rudolf Bultmann, The Christianity of Revelation has to be termed a weakly Christianized Judaism. The significance of Christ is practically limited to this: that he gives the passionate eschatological hope a certainty which the Jewish apocalyptists lack.3

For both Luther and Bultmann, the association with the Jewish apocalypses had negative overtones. This is a theological judgment, not usually shared by scholars in the history of religions tradition, but by no means unusual. Consequendy, theologically minded scholars who seek to defend the book are often at pains to distinguish it from the Jewish apocalypses, by insisting on its prophetic character, 4 or, recendy, on its epistolary form. 5 The tendency to import theological evaluation into the discussion of literary issues is unfortunate, and can only confuse the situation. 1

F. Lücke, Versuch einer vollständigen Einleitung in die Offenbarung Johannis und in die gesamte apokalyptische Literatur (Bonn: Weber, 1832). 2 M. Luther, "Vorrede auf die OfTenbarung des Johannes," in Das Neue Testament Deutsch (Wittenberg, 1522). E. Lohse, "Wie Christlich ist die Offenbarung des Johannes?" NTS 34(1988) 322. 3 R. Bultmann. Theology of the New Testament (New York: Scribners, 1955) 2.175. 4 D. Hm, "Prophecy and Prophets in the Revelation of St. John," NTS 18(197172) 401-18; F.D. Mazzaferri, The Genre of the Book of Revelationfroma Source-Critical Perspective (BZNW 54; Berlin: de Gruyter, 1988) 259-378. See also E. Schüssler Fiorenza, "The Phenomenon of Early Christian Apocalyptic," in D. Hellholm, ed., Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East (Tübingen: Mohr, 1983) 312, who insists on the prophetic character of Revelation but does not deny its continuity with Jewish apocalypticism. 5 M. Karrer, Die Johannesoffenbarung als Brief (FRLANT 140; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1986),

The dependence of Revelation on the tradition of Jewish apocalypticism cannot seriously be doubted. Nonetheless, every individual literary work has some distinctive features, and it is reasonable to ask whether the distinctive features of Revelation over against the Jewish apocalypses are due specifically to its Christian character and how great a difference they make in worldview and in ethical implications. The apocalyptic tradition In order to appreciate the distinctiveness of Revelation, it is necessary to bear in mind the tradition it inherited from Judaism. The Jewish apocalypses may be divided into two types: those that describe otherworldly ascents, such as that of Enoch, and those that are historically oriented, such as Daniel. 6 Although John is called up to the heavenly throne-room in Revelation 4, the affinities of his visions are primarily with Daniel rather than with Enoch. Major representatives of the type, 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch, are roughly contemporary with Revelation. The various parallels between these books, however, cannot be adequately explained by theories of literary dependence, and require us to posit traditions that circulated orally or in sources no longer extant. 7 There is also a corpus of relevant literature, such as the Sibylline Oracles and the Dead Sea Scrolls, that is not in the literary form of apocalypses but that has similar views of history and eschatology. The most important precedent for John's apocalyptic visions is without doubt the Book of Daniel, 8 although the central place of the messiah in Revelation is more closely paralleled in the contemporary apocalypses of 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch.9 Daniel, of course, was often regarded as a prophet, both in ancient Judaism (Josephus; 4 Q Florilegium) and in early Christianity (Matt 24:15), although his book is not grouped with the Prophets in the Hebrew Bible.10 Revelation, too is presented not only as apo6

J.J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination (New York: Crossroad, 1984) 1-32. R. Bauckham, The Climax of Prophecy. Studies on the Book of Revelation (Edinburgh: Clark, 1993) 38-91 ("The Use οΓ Apocalyptic Traditions"). 8 For the influence of Daniel on Revelation see A. Yarbro Collins, "The Influence of Daniel on the New Testament," in J J . Collins, Daniel (Hermcneia; Minncapolis: Fortress, 1993) 90-112. 9 U.B. Müller, Messias und Menschensohn in jüdischen Apokalypsen und in der Offenbarung des Johannes (Gütersloh: Mohn, 1972). On the influence of Daniel's "Son of Man" in Revelation see A. Yarbro Collins, "The Son of Man Tradition and the Book of Revelation," i n j . H. Charlesworth, ed., The Messiah (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992) 536-68. ‫ "י‬Κ. Koch, "Is Daniel also among the Prophets?" Interpretation 39(1985) 117-30; Collins, Daniel, 52. 7

kalypsis, but as a prophecy (1:3; 22:6-7) and its author is properly regarded as an early Christian prophet." Prophecy was a broad category in the Hellenistic and Roman worlds, and could encompass various kinds of revelation including what we call apocalyptic.12 Nonetheless, the Book of Daniel already involved a transformation of prophecy as it had been practiced in ancient Israel. The transformation involved both form and content. The author of Daniel did not speak in his own name, but concealed his identity behind a pseudonym. He did not claim direct inspiration by God, but reported visions that had been mediated to him by angels. The content of the prophecy did not consist of oracles or direct exhortation, but rather relied on visionary descriptions to put the events of history in a new light. The emphasis was on understanding rather than on direct exhortation. The vision encompassed a wide sweep of history, culminating in a time of crisis, followed by an eschatological judgement. The author's present, then, was put in perspective as part of a cosmic plan. While some of these features were anticipated in exilic and post-exilic prophecy, especially in Ezekiel and Zechariah, the total Gestalt was developed in Daniel in a way that was quite new. Most crucially, Daniel differed from earlier prophecy in extending the hope of resurrection and glory after death to those who understood the message and were faithful to the end. The fact that Daniel and most apocalypses rely on symbolic language to convey a new understanding of events, and seldom exhort the reader direcdy, has been a source of much misunderstanding. No less an authority than Martin Buber alleged that "the apocalyptic writer has no audience turned towards him; he speaks into his notebook. 5 ' 13 But Daniel's visions carried a powerful message for the Jewish people during the persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes, by the way in which they described the world. Actions

11 M.E. Boring, "The Apocalypse as Christian Prophecy," in G.W. MacRae, ed., SBL Seminar Papers, 1974 (Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1974) 2.43-62. D.E. Aune, Prophecy in early Christianity and the Ancient Mediterranean World (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983) 274-88; E. Schüssler Fiorenza, "Apokalypsis and Propheteia: Revelation in the Context of Early Christian Prophecy," in The Book of Revelation. Justice and Judgment (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985) 133-56 (= J . Lambrecht, ed., L'Apocalypse johannique et l'Apocalyptique dans le Nouveau Testament (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1980) 105-28.. 12 J . Barton, Oracles of God. Perceptions of Ancient Prophecy in Israel after the Exile (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988). For a balanced appreciation of Revelation as both prophetic and apocalyptic see R. Bauckham, The Theology of the Book of Revelation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993) 2-9. 13 M. Buber, "Prophecy, Apocalyptic and the Historical Hour, "Pointing the Way (New York: Harper, 1957) 200.

are shaped by understanding, and the descriptive visions of Daniel could influence the reader just as profoundly as the direct harangues of Amos or Jeremiah. Moreover, not all apocalyptic writings were as reticent about direct exhortation as was Daniel. / Enoch concludes with the socalled Epistle of Enoch, which addresses the reader as directly as any prophet. Roughly contemporary with Revelation, 2 Baruch coneluded its revelation with a long letter to the nine and a half tribes that were across the Euphrates, which spelled out its message in explicit detail (2 Bar 78-86). Parenesis, then, is by no means alien to Jewish apocalypses, even if it is often achieved by indirect means. Distinctive features of Revelation Revelation has often contrasted with the Jewish apocalypses with respect to its parenetic emphasis. 14 In addition to its selfcharacterization as apocalypse and prophecy, the whole book of Revelation is presented as a circular letter to the seven churches of Asia Minor. 15 The use of the letter form reflects the practice of other Christian teachers, most notably Paul, and says something about the situation in which John wrote. But letters are of many kinds, and the fact that something is sent as a circular letter does not determine the message it contains, the form in which that message is cast or the kind of authority it claims. The specific letters to the seven churches at the beginning of Revelation have an obvious parallel in the letter at the end of 2 Baruch.16 Revelation is exceptional insofar as the whole book is presented as a letter, presumably because John was not able to visit the seven churches in person. The letter was presumably read to the assembled congregations to which it was sent. Jewish apocalypses were also circulated, but we do not know how. A difference in the manner of circulation, however, is extrinsic to the nature of the work itself, and points to the distinctiveness of early Christian assemblies rather than to that of Revelation. The 14

302.

E.g. Schüssler Fiorenza, "The Phenomenon of Early Christian Apocalyptic,"

15 See the extensive discussion by Karrcr, Die Johannesoffenbarung als Brief, but also the more balanced discussion of Bauckham, The Theology of the Book of Revelation, 12-17. 16 P.M. Bogacrt, "Les Apocalypses contemporaines de Baruch, d'Esdras et dc Jean," in J . Lambrecht, ea. L'Apocalypse johannique et l'Apcalyptique dans le Nouveau Testament (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1980) 55, argues that Revelation was influenced by 2 Baruch in its use of the epistolary form, but this must be considered dubious. Karrcr, in contrast tries to minimize the relevance of the parallel (Die Johannesoffenbarung ab Brief, 49-52)

body of Revelation, in chaps. 4-22, is unlike anything that we find in any other New Testament epistle.17 While Revelation is, among other things, a circular letter, this designation is of very limited help in appreciating the content of the book. Two other distinctive features of Revelation are commonly cited as evidence of its prophetic character: the fact that John did not use a pseudonym and the absence of historical reviews (such as the schema of the four kingdoms in Daniel).18 Some scholars have tried to make pseudepigraphy into the sine qua non of apocalyptic writing,19 but this is surely to over-rate it. Pseudepigraphy is only one of several formal markers of the apocalypses and is by no means peculiar to the genre. Historical reviews are clearly not a sine qua non, even in historically oriented apocalypses. (They are equally lacking in the Similitudes of Enoch). Nonetheless, the absence of both these features in Revelation is noteworthy. The two features are closely related. By attributing his revelation to a great figure of the past, such as Daniel or Enoch, an author was able to have that figure "prophesy" the course of intervening history after the fact, and thereby enhance both the authority and the credibility of his message.20 T h e absence of pseudepigraphy and ex eventu prophecy point to one fundamental difference between Revelation and all Jewish apocalypses. This concerns its location on the historical and eschatological time-table. O n e of the purposes of historical reviews was to enable the readers to see where they stood in the course of pre-determined events. Typically, they stood near the end. In Daniel, sixty nine and a half weeks of years have passed; only half a week remains until the time of deliverance. In Revelation, however, as in all the early Christian writings, a crucial act of deliverance has already taken place with the death and resurrection of Jesus. For this reason, Revelation shows no interest in history prior to Jesus. Presumably, it has become irrelevant. The conviction that the eschatological age has begun gave rise in early Christianity to a new outpouring of prophecy, and lent new authority to prophetic utterances. For that reason, John did not need to enhance his authority by presenting his work as the revelation of Enoch or 17 Karrer, Die Johannesoffenbarung als Brief, 282, argues that there is an implicit dialogue with the reader throughout the book, but such an orientation is not peculiady epistolary, and can be argued equally well for the visions of Daniel. 18 Schüssler Fiorenza, "The Phenomenon of Early Chrisdan Apocalyptic," 310. 19 So especially Mazzaferri, The Genre of the Book of Revelation, 181-84. 20 J.J. Collins, "Pseudonymity, Historical Reviews and the Genre of the Revelation o f j o h n , " CBQ.39(1977) 329-43.

Baruch, but could claim authority in his own name. We should note, however, that these changes did not prove to be essential to the Christian adaptation of the apocalyptic genre. Subsequent Christian apocalypses dispense with the epistolary framework and only the Shepherd of Hermas refuses the device of pseudonymity. 21 While Christianity had its own new understanding of its place on the eschatological timetable, we should note that the apocalyptic genre admitted some variation in this matter. While Daniel envisages a single turning point in history, the Apocalypse of Weeks, an Enochic writing from Maccabean times, allows for a two-stage eschatology. The "chosen righteous from the eternal plant of righteousness" are chosen at the end of the seventh week. History continues, however, and it is only in the tenth week that the judgement takes place followed by a new creation. The eighth and ninth weeks are characterized by the progressive triumph of righteousness. In Revelation, in contrast, the death and resurrection of Jesus are followed by the reign of the beasts. In this respect, the kind of timetable envisaged in Revelation is closer to what is presupposed in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Damascus Document (1:7) posits a turning point in history when God causes a shoot to sprout from Aaron and Israel (presumably the emergence of the sect). Nonetheless Belial is still loosed on Israel in the period following this turning point (4:13). Jewish eschatology, then, was not all strictly future, but could allow for an "in-between" stage, or for a measure of realized eschatology. What we find in Revelation, and throughout the New Testament, is a particular actualization of this "in-between" stage, in specifically Christian terms. Thus far, then, we find that Revelation does indeed modify the typical apocalyptic genre in certain ways, reflecting the Christian conviction that the messiah has already come and that the eschatological age has begun. These modifications do not entail a rejection of the apocalyptic worldview, but actualize it in a particular way, that is not without analogy in Judaism. Moreover, as Bultmann noted, John is very similar to the Jewish apocalypticists in his emphasis on the distress of the present and the hope for a deliverance yet to come. The understanding of history and the ethical implications entailed by this new situation are still shaped to a great degree by the conventions of Jewish apocalypticism. In order to probe further the interplay of Jewish tradition and Christian

21

For an overview of the Christian apocalypses, see A. Yarbro Collins, "The Early Christian Apocalypses," Semeia 14(1979) 61-121.

innovation I propose to look more closely at the use of traditional messianic imagery in Revelation, and its application to the Christian messiah. The Son of Man and the Lamb that was Slain Twice in the opening chapters of Revelation traditional imagery is applied to Jesus in strikingly new ways. First, in 1:12-16, J o h n sees "one like a Son of Man, clothed in a long robe...His head and his hair were white as white wool, white as snow." What is remarkable about this picture is that two figures from Daniel 7, the whiteheaded Ancient of Days and the one like a Son of Man, are fused into one. 22 While there is some fluidity in Jewish texts between descriptions of angels and those of the deity, the fusion here must be seen as purposeful. Significandy, the Son of Man does not refuse John's obeisance, as the angels elsewhere do (Rev 19:10; 22:8-9). In Revelation, the messiah/Son of Man is one who may be worshipped, and this point is reiterated in Chapter 5.23 There were Jewish precedents for referring to the messiah as Son of God, and much of the imagery associated with the Son of Man was also associated with the deity,24 but worship of any figure other than the Most High God is highly exceptional in a Jewish context. 25 The worship ofJesus, and the way in which divine imagery is applied to him, marks perhaps the most fundamental point at which Revelation departs from Jewish precedent. Another striking image is offered in Chapter 5. John is told that "the Lion of the tribe ofJudah, the Root of David, has conquered," but what he sees is not a lion but "a lamb standing as if it had been slaughtered" (5:6). T h e lion is a traditional messianic symbol (Gen 49:9). T h e lamb only acquired messianic significance in a Chrisrian context because of its sacrificial connotations and the death of Jesus. 26 In the words of David Barr: 22

See Yarbro Collins, "The , Son of Man' Tradition and the Book of Revelation." The two figures are also identified in the Old Greek translation of Daniel, but this is most probably due to textual corruption. 23 Bauckham, The Climax of Prophecy, 133-40 ("The Worship of Jesus"). 24 J.J. Collins, The Scepter and the Star. The Messiahs of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Ancient Literature (New York: Doubleday, 1995) 154-72 ("The Messiah as the Son of God") and 173-94 ("The Danielic Son of Man"). 25 L.W. Hurtado, One God, One Lord: Early Christian Devotion and Ancient Jewish Monotheism (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988). It is possible that the Son of Man is the recipient of worship in 1 Enoch 48:5 (Similitudes), but it is also possible that the worship is directed to the Lord of Spirits in that passage. 26 Lohse, "Wie Chrisdich ist die Offenbarung des Johannes?" 329.

a more complete reversal of value would be hard to imagine...the Lamb is the Lion. Jesus is the Messiah, but he has performed his messianic office in a most extraordinary way, by his death. 27

It is important, however, to see that the two symbols are held in tension. The Lion is not simply replaced by the Lamb, as will become evident later in Revelation Chapter 19.28 Rather, the point is that the Lamb, who died a shameful death on the cross, is now enthroned in power and glory as the Lion. A somewhat similar tension can be found in the Similitudes of Enoch.29 There the Son of Man, or Righteous One, is the heavenly champion of the poor and the lowly, who are the righteous ones on earth. The heavenly righteous one is hidden, but when he will be revealed he will cast down the kings and the mighty and exalt the lowly righteous ones. Revelation differs from the Similitudes, however, in one important respect. In the Christian context, the Son of Man is not only the champion of the lowly; he has himself experienced their lot. The persecuted Christians can identify with the Lamb that was slain more fully than with a figure who is only revealed in glory. The war with the Dragon Revelation chapter 12 is a promising test case for our purpose, since it provides an exceptionally clear example of the use ofJewish source material, in the account of the battle between Michael and the Dragon in vss. 7-9. This passage is surrounded by three other units to make up the chapter. First we read of the woman giving birth in heaven, under the hostile watch of the Dragon. Her child is clearly identifiable as the messiah, the one who is to rule the nations with a rod of iron (cf. Ps 2:9). He is immediately snatched away to God and his throne. This passage is usually understood as a reference to the ascension of Jesus, 30 but the fact that there is no reference to his death has given rise to the suspicion that here too we may have a Jewish source.31 In the present context, the passage must be read as a highly condensed synopsis of the career of the messiah. There is no interest here in history before the birth of the messiah, not even in

27

D.L. Barr, "The Apocalypse as a Symbolic Transformation of the World: A Literary Analysis," Interpretation 38(1984) 41. 28 See A. Yarbro Collins, "Eschatology in the Book of Revelation," Ex Auditu 6(1990) 69-70. 29 Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, 142-54. 30 P. Prigent, Apocalypse 12. Histoire de l'exégèse (Tübingen: Mohr, 1959) 8, 136. 31 Α. Yarbro Collins, The Combat Myth in the Book of Revelation (Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1976) 105.

the history of Israel. The focus falls on the short interval between the time of Christ and the author's present. The second section, vss. 7-9 tells of the battle in heaven between Michael and the Dragon. This is a new episode, linked to the preceding verses by the figure of the Dragon. The abrupt transition and the fact that Michael rather than Christ is the protagonist constitute strong evidence that we have here a Jewish source. T h e casting down of Satan had its biblical source in Isaiah 14, and was developed in an apocalyptic context, possibly as early as the first century CE, in 2 Enoch 29 and the Life of Adam and Eve 12-17.32 The role of Michael as heavenly warrior is adumbrated in Daniel 10 in his batde with the Prince of Greece and again in the War Scroll from Qumran where his adversary is Belial. The Dragon of Revelation 12 resembles Belial as a cosmic, Satanic, figure. It seems likely, then, that we have here a fragment of a Jewish myth. The placement of this fragment in Revelation is remarkable, however, since it marks neither the beginning nor the end of history but follows the birth and exaltation of the messiah. In short, the birth and snatching up of the messiah only marks the beginning of the eschatological woes. In the context of Revelation as a whole, the messiah will come again. The double coming of the messiah is, of course, a specifically Christian concept, necessitated by the abrupt termination of the earthly career of Jesus. The third section of Revelation 12 is for all practical purposes a reinterpretation of the second. The "loud voice" proclaims "the kingdom of our God" and the authority of the messiah. But here the defeat of Satan is not attributed to Michael, but to the Christian brethren who have defeated him by "the blood of the Lamb" and by their testimony, "for they did not cling to life in the face of death." The martyrs share in the victory of Michael by their willingness to die. Finally, the last section of the chapter describes how the dragon sets off to make war on earth "in great wrath because his time is short." The third section, in particular, gives a clear picture of the ethical implications of the vision. It is an ethic for martyrdom. 33 Christians can defeat Satan by refusing to cling to life in the face of death. In this they are inspired by the powerful example of Christ; hence the "blood of the Lamb." But while this ethic of martyrdom has a distinctively Christian nuance here, it is not without precedent in

32

Ibid., 82. A. Yarbro Collins, "The Political Perspective of the Revelation to John," JBL 96(1977) 241-56. 33

Judaism. 34 In Daniel 10-12 the heroes in the time of persecution are the wise teachers who fall by sword and flame "so that they may be refined, purified and cleansed" (Dan 11: 35) but who subsequently shine like the stars in the resurrection. They are not said explicitly to defeat the "prince of Greece" but they share in the victory at the resurrection. In both texts, the key to victory and exaltation is willingness to renounce life in this world. 35 The primary difference between the two passages is that in Revelation the ethic is reinforced by the example of Jesus, and the ultimate victory is guaranteed by his exaltation. The central Christian event of the death and resurrection ofJesus, then, leads to a modification of the structure of eschatology, insofar as the career of the messiah is both past and future. This modification, however, does not lead to a different ethic from that of a Jewish apocalypse like Daniel, but reinforces it by the example of Christ and strengthens the certainty of the outcome. Here again it is important to note that the role of Michael is supplemented, not negated. The victory of the martyrs is not just a moral victory. Revelation, like Daniel, emphatically asserts that evil is overthrown in an objective sense. In Daniel and the Qumran War Scroll, Michael plays a key role in the final phase of the battle. In Revelation, he is relegated to the first phase. The final phase is ushered in by the theophany of Christ as Divine Warrior in Chapter 19. The sword of his mouth A third illustration of the transformation of Jewish tradition is provided by Revelation 19. Here John sees the heavens opened and a rider on a white horse, who is identified as the Word of God and is clearly the messiah. He leads the armies of heaven. From his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. Subsequently, the beast and the false prophet are thrown alive into the lake of fire and their followers are slain by the rider on the horse. The image of the sword of the mouth is derived from Isaiah 11:4 and is a staple of messianic prophecy around the turn of the era. 36 The Hebrew text of Isaiah speaks of "the rod of his mouth," with which he shall strike the earth, while with the breath of his lips he shall slay the wicked. The Septuagint rendered the phrase in question as "the word of his mouth" and it is quoted in this form in 34

Cf. Bauckham, The Climax of Prophecy, 237. Sec further J.J. Collins, "Apocalyptic Eschatology as the Transcendence of Death," CBQ,35(1974) 21-43. 36 Collins, The Scepter and the Star, 49-68. 35

the Psalms of Solomon 17:24-5. The effect is equally destructive: the messiah is to smash the arrogance of sinners like a potter's jar; to shatter all their substance with an iron rod; to destroy the unlawful nations with the word of his mouth.

Similarly, in the Dead Sea Scrolls we find a prayer for the messianic "Prince of the Congregation:" (May you smite the peoples) with the might of your hand and ravage the earth with your scepter; may you bring death to the ungodly with the breath of your lips ( l Q S b 5:24-5).

T h e apocalypse of 4 Ezra, roughly contemporary with Revelation, envisages the messiah as a man who rises from the sea and wages war against a hostile multitude: And behold when he saw the onrush of the approaching multitude, he neither lifted his hand nor held a spear or any weapon of war; but I saw only how he sent forth from his mouth as it were a stream of fire and from his lips a flaming breath and from his tongue he shot forth a storm of sparks. All these were mingled together, the stream of fire and the flaming breath and the great storm, and fell on the onrushing multitude which was prepared to fight and burned them all up, so that suddenly nothing was seen of the innumerable multitude but only the dust and ashes and the smell of smoke (4 Ezra 13:9-11).

It should be noted that the violence of the messiah typically has a fantastic character. He was not expected to prevail by normal military means, but by divine power. The implications of this imagery for human action might vary. Apocalyptic visions could sometimes be used to encourage militant action. 37 More typically, however, the apocalyptic tradition was quietistic. Daniel dismissed the Maccabees as at most "a little help" (Dan 11:34). 4 Ezra most probably meant to discourage revolutionary initiatives by promising a greater miraculous deliverance in the future. But if the violence of the judgment had a fantastic, miraculous character, it was none the less real. It is essential to the logic of both 4 Ezra and of Revelation that the wicked will actually be destroyed. We are often told that the violent imagery of divine judgment is "transvalued" in Revelation. David Barr argues that "we have here all the traditional images of the eschatological battle, but again they are reversed." 38 Since the wicked are slain by "the sword of his mouth,"

37 38

T h e Animal Apocalypse in 1 Enoch appears to support the Maccabean revolt. Barr, "The Apocalypse as a Symbolic Transformation of the World," 42.

they are undone, that is, by the word of Jesus which is on the one hand the Word of God...but also the word of his testimony...Thus, once again, it is the death ofJesus and the witness of his followers that slays the wicked.39

Similarly, M. Eugene Boring writes: This conqueror destroys his enemies, not with a literal sword, but with the sword of his mouth; his only weapon is his word, the Word of God which he himself is (19:13).40 But, as we have seen, the sword or word or breath of his mouth is the standard weaponry of the messiah in Jewish apocalypticism. It is not, to be sure, ordinary human violence, but it brings death and destruction nonetheless. The activity of Christ as divine warrior in Chapter 19 cannot be equated with his death which has already taken place. It is of the essence of the apocalyptic vision in both Judaism and Christianity that the defeat of evil and the wicked is a real, public event that only takes place at the end of history. The death of Jesus marks a veritable D-day in the eschatological timetable, but the final judgment is yet to come. Rather than a transvaluation of apocalyptic imagery, what we find in Revelation 19 is a transvaluation of the figure of Jesus of Nazareth. There is nothing in the Gospels to suggest that Jesus wielded a sword against anyone, either by hand or mouth. Precisely for that reason, the idea that he was the messiah, son of David, must have seemed extremely paradoxical to most Jews of the time. The expectations associated with the messiah are set forth quite clearly in such texts as the Psalms of Solomon and the Scroll of Benedictions (lQSb) from Qumran, which we have cited above. He was to drive the Gentiles from Jerusalem, slay them with the breath of his mouth and rule them with an iron rod. The historical career ofJesus hardly fulfilled these expectations. What we find in Revelation, and to a lesser extent in other apocalyptic passages such as Mark 13, is the projection into the future of what was unfulfilled in the past. Jesus did not destroy the wicked in his earthly life, but he would return with supernatural power to complete the task. The picture of Christ that we get in Revelation 19 is at variance with any account of the historical Jesus, but it conforms perfectly to the expectations of the apocalyptic genre.

39

Ibid. M.E. Boring, Révélation (Interpretation; Louisville: Knox, 1989) 196. See also the criticism of this position by A. Yarbro Collins, "Eschatology in the Book of Revelation" 69-70. 40

Here again we find that the ethics of Revelation are shaped by apocalyptic tradition rather than by Christian innovation. Nowhere does J o h n of Patmos tell us to love our enemies, nor does he preach forgiveness. Rather, his themes are justice and judgment, and in this respect he stands fully in the tradition ofJewish apocalypticism. Conclusion The new situation of Christianity led to some modifications in the apocalyptic genre, intensifying the focus on the present and imminent future and expanding the role of the messiah. The Christian apocalypticist writes at a different point on the eschatological timetable from his Jewish counterpart. The messiah has already come. T h e life of the messiah, and especially his suffering and death are available to the Christian visionary as a source of inspiration and example. Moreover, the role of the messiah in Revelation is more exalted than in any Jewish apocalypse, since he is the recipient of worship. But Christianity did not simply bend the apocalyptic genre to its purpose. The transformations worked both ways. The impact of apocalyptic conventions is most obvious in the portrayal of Jesus as divine warrior in Chapter 19, a portrayal that draws little from the Gospels and that is strikingly similar to the contemporary portrayal of the messiah in 4 Ezra. Moreover, the ethical values of Revelation are not conspicuously different from those of Jewish apocalypses such as Daniel and 4 Ezra, and lack the most distinctive notes of the teaching of Jesus. These observations should not, however, be taken in the spirit of Luther to question the authenticity of Revelation as a Christian book. Rather they should serve to remind us that the roots of Christianity are deeply embedded in Jewish soil.

PART T W O DANIEL

CHAPTER EIGHT

NEBUCHADNEZZAR AND T H E K I N G D O M O F G O D Defened Eschatology in the Jewish Diaspora The Book of Daniel contains, in its first six chapters, a collection of stories which are older than the apocalyptic visions of the Maccabean era, and were composed for a very different setting.1 These stories describe the adventures of Daniel and his companions at the court of successive Babylonian kings and of "Darius the Mede." While the stories are legendary in character, they depict vividly some of the issues which confronted Jews in exile. Daniel and his friends enter the service of the Gentile kings, but still retain their Jewish identity and faith. So, in the opening chapter, they refuse the royal food, evidendy for reasons of kashrut. The three young men in Chap. 3 risk death rather than worship the statue which the king has erected. In Chap. 6 Daniel risks his life rather than neglect his daily prayers. Chaps. 2 and 4 emphasize the superior ability of the God of Daniel to reveal mysteries, and Chap. 5 shows that even a powerful king cannot ofTend that God with impunity. Daniel's involvement at the court, and his professional involvement with Babylonian sages, in no way dilute his adherence to traditional Jewish monotheism and opposition to idolatry. Conversely, Daniel's religious loyalty in no way impedes his allegiance to the Gentile kings. T o be sure, it is "the God of heaven" who has given the kingdom to Nebuchadnezzar (2:37), and that God sets up kings and removes them in turn (2:21), but sovereignty on earth has been entrusted to Gentile kings. In the political theology of Daniel 1-6, the eternal kingdom of the God of heaven is over all. On earth there is a universal dominion, called simply "the kingdom," which passes from Babylon to Media to Persia. This state of affairs has been compared to that envisaged in Chronicles, where the Lord rules all the kingdoms of the nations (2 Chron 20:6) but has entrusted them to Cyrus, king of Persia (2 Chron 36:23).2 Unlike the

1

See J o h n J . Collins, The Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Daniel (Missoula: Scholars, 1977) 8-11; Reinhard G. Kratz, Translatio Imperii. Untersuchungen zu den aramäischcn Danielerzählungen und ihrem theologiegeschichtlichcn Umfeld (WMANT 63; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neularchener Verlag, 1991) 146-8. 2 Kratz, Translatio Imperii, 260-79.

Chronicler, however, Daniel 1-6 has no interest in the Davidic line and, although its horizon extends to "the first year of King Cyrus" (1: 21; 6:29), it makes no mention of the Jewish restoration. The perspective of Daniel 1-6, in sharp contrast to Chaps. 7-12 is not eschatological, but oriented to the present. There is one apparent exception on this point, however. Chap. 2 contains Nebuchadnezzar's famous dream, of a statue with a head of gold, breast and arms of silver, loins and thighs of bronze, legs of iron and feet of iron and clay, which will be destroyed by a stone which strikes the feet. Daniel interprets this dream with reference to four kingdoms, of which Nebuchadnezzar represents the first. The stone which destroys the statue is interpreted by the statement that "in those days the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which will never be destroyed," and which will bring all previous kingdoms to an end. This is the only passage in Daniel 1-6 which speaks of the destruction of Gentile rule as such, or of an eschatological realization of the kingdom of God on earth. Reinhard Kratz has argued that this eschatological interlude is anomalous in the tales of Daniel 1-6 and should be regarded as a secondary alteration. 3 The original dream would then have envisaged only the fall of the Babylonian empire to the Medes and Persians, and would have had an historical perspective similar to Chaps. 4 and 5. T h e chronological frame of Daniel 1-6 involves not four kingdoms, but three, Babylon, Media and Persia. The tales would then present a tightly coherent ideology, and would admit of an early, pre-Hellenistic date. Kratz's suggestion, however, requires drastic textual surgery, including the rejection of the interpretation found in the text, which interprets the metals as successive kingdoms. If the statue is interpreted in terms of kingdoms, the imagery requires that they be at least four in number. If Babylon is the first kingdom, the fourth can be no earlier than the Greek, and the composition must date to the Hellenistic period. It may well be that the dream was not originally composed for its present context, and it may originally have had a different meaning, 4 but the eschatological dimension is integral to the interpretation now found in the text. It is my contention that this interpretation makes excellent sense in the context of Daniel 1-6, and that it should not be removed to make the text conform to modern ideas of coherence. 3

Ibid., 48-70. E.g. that the metals represented individual kings within the Babylonian kingdom, which is then overthrown by the Medo-Pcrsian empire (so Kratz, Translatio Imperii, 62-70, among others). 4

The four kingdoms The schema of four kingdoms, followed by a fifth of definitive character, is well known from Roman historiography. The typical Roman view is expressed in a fragment attributed to one Aemilius Sura: The Assyrians were the first of all races to hold power, then the Medes, after them the Persians, and then the Macedonians. Then when the two kings, Philip and Antiochus, of Macedonian origin, had been completely conquered, soon after the overthrow of Carthage, the supreme command passed to the Roman people. 5

This Roman use of the schema is neither revolutionary nor eschatological, except insofar as it proclaims a "realized eschatology" in the Roman empire. It is evident, however, that the Roman authors were adapting an older schema. The sequence of Assyria, Media and Persia was not derived from Roman or Greek history, but must have originated in the east. In fact, this "three kingdom schema" is known from Herodotus and Ktesias, who derived it from Persian sources.6 This original schema, like the later Roman one, was not revolutionary, but served to propagate the view that the Achaemenid empire was the legitimate heir to the earlier world kingdoms. Daniel 2 differs from the schema attested in Herodotus and Ktesias in two respects. Babylon replaces Assyria as the first kingdom, and the sequence is extended to four kingdoms, followed by a kingdom of God. The substitution of Babylon for Assyria can be attributed to the author of Daniel 2, since it is required by the setting in the court of Nebuchadnezzar. The extension of sequence of kingdoms, however, is not likely to have originated with Daniel. Not only is the Roman topos of four kingdoms followed by a fifth independent of Daniel, but the original sequence of Assyria, Media, Persia is also found in a Jewish "four kingdom" passage in the Fourth Sibylline Oracle?

5 The fragment is preserved in Velleius Paterculus, who wrote about the tum of the era. Sura appears to regard the second Punic war (218-201 BCE) as decisive, so he presumably wrote before the third Punic war (149-46). See also Polybius 38.22, Dionysius of Halicamassus 1.2.2-4, Tacitus, Hist 5.8-9, Appian, Preface, 9, and Doron Mendels, "The Five Empires. A Note on a Hellenistic Topos," American Journal of Philology 102 (1981) 330-37. 6 Herodotus 1.95, 130; Ktesias in Diodorus Siculus 2.21.8; 28.8; 32.5-6; 34.6. 7 See David Flusser, "The four empires in the Fourth Sibyl and in the book of Daniel," Israel Oriental Studies 2 (1972) 148-75.

In a famous article published in 1940, Joseph Ward Swain argued that the sequence of four kingdoms followed by a fifth was a motif of Near Eastern resistance to Hellenism." He suggested that the Romans picked up the motif from anti-Seleucid propaganda after the battle of Magnesia in 190 BCE The evidence for this theory is admittedly slight. The only Near Eastern texts which attest the motif are the Jewish ones. The Jewish evidence is important, however. Daniel, at least shows that the sequence of four kingdoms was known by the early second century, and was not of Roman origin. The Sibylline passage, too, may point to a pre-Roman, anti- Hellenistic use of the motif, since the oracle against Rome appears to be a redactional insertion. 9 It is likely, then, that the Roman tradition was adapted from an older anti-Hellenistic schema of four kingdoms, beginning with Assyria. Daniel 2 also presupposes the existence of such a schema, and adapts it to begin with Babylon. In Daniel 2 the sequence of four kingdoms is expressed through the symbolism of metals in a statue. Here too we encounter traditional symbolism. The sequence of metals, of declining value, is best known from Hesiod's Works and Days, 1.109-201. Hesiod describes a sequence of five ages, golden, silver, bronze, a fourth which is not identified with a metal, and iron. The fourth age breaks the pattern of decline, and is inserted to accommodate the heroes of Greek legend. It is likely, then, that Hesiod was already adapting a pre-existing schema of four ages represented by metals. The ultimate origin of this schema is unknown. 10 The sequence of metals also appears in Persian tradition, most notably in the Bahman Yasht, chap. 1. There we read that Ahura Mazda showed "the wisdom of all-knowledge" to Zarathustra. Through it he saw "the trunk of a tree, on which there were four branches: one of gold, one of silver, one of steel and one of mixed iron."11 These are interpreted as "the four periods which will come" 8 J.W. Swain, "The Theory of the Four Monarchies Opposition History under the Roman Empire," Classical Philology 35 (1940) 1-21. 9 The Sibyl structures history in ten generations and four kingdoms. Macedonia is the tenth generation and fourth kingdom. Rome is the subject of a further oracle, but it is not integrated into the numerical sequence. See Flusser, "The four empires," 148-53; John J. Collins, "The Place of the Fourth Sibyl in the Devclopment of the Jewish Sibyllina," JJS 25 (1974) 365-80. 10 Walter Burkert, "Apokalyptik im frühen Griechentum: Impulse und Transformationen,"in David Hellholm, ed., Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the near East (Tübingen: Mohr, 1983) 235-54, posits an Aramaic sibyl as the common source of Hesiod and Daniel, but this is simply an appeal to the unknown. On the Indo-Iranian Urmythos see Bodo Gatz, Weltalter, goldene Zeit und sinnverwandte Vorstellungen (Spudasmata 16, Hildesheim: Olms, 1967). 11 B.T. Anklesaria, Zand-î Vohûman Yasn and Two Pahlevi Fragments (Bombay:

in the millennium of Zarathustra. The golden period is the period of Zarathustra himself and that of mixed iron is "the evil sovereignty of the 'divs' having dishevelled hair... " The same division of periods and metals is found in Denkard 9.8, where the periods are identified differently.12 The motif of "mixed iron" is particularly interesting in relation to Daniel, especially since it is not found in Hesiod. The significance of the Persian parallels is clouded by the uncertainty of dating. It has been argued that the 'divs' with dishevelled hair in the Bahman Yasht refer to the Macedonians, and that this, too, was a document of anti-Hellenistic resistance.13 The Yasht as we have it, however, is several centuries later than Daniel. The Bahman Yasht and the Denkard preserve material from lost texts of the Avesta, but there is no consensus on the antiquity of the particular motif of the four metals/periods. 14 Nonetheless, the similarities between the texts, especially in the motif of "mixed iron," can scarcely be coincidental. Daniel's statue provides a more appropriate setting for the metals than the tree of the Bahman Yasht, but direct dependence of either text on the other cannot be demonstrated. 15 Here again, we must posit a common source, and suppose that Daniel 2 is adapting imagery which was more widely known. The adaptation of traditions in Daniel 2 The combination of kingdoms and metals in the imagery of the statue implies gradual decline in the political order of the Near East. The destruction of the statue implies the subordination of all these kingdoms to the kingdom of God. The eschatological implications of the dream were already present in the traditional material adapted by the author of Daniel 2. What is remarkable in the biblical text is the lack of emphasis on its eschatological features. In the context of Daniel 2 the primary emphasis falls on Daniel's ability to tell and Cama Oriental Institute, 1957) 101-02. A variant schema is found in chap. 3, according to which there are seven metal branches, indicating periods. 12 See Flusser, "The four empires," 165-74. 13 S.K. Eddy, The King is Dead. Studies in the Near Eastern Resistance to Hellenism 33432 B.C. (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1961) 19. 14 The antiquity of the Bahman Yasht is disputed by Philippe Gignoux, "Apocalypses et Voyages Extra-Terrestres dans l'Iran Mazdéen," in C. Kappler, et al., Apocalypses et Voyages dans l'Au-Delà (Paris: Cerf, 1987) 353. 15 Jacques Duchesne-Guillemin, "Apocalypse juive et apocalypse iranienne," in U. Bianchi and M.J.Vermaseren, eds., La sotenologia dei culti orientait nell' Impero Romano (Leiden: Brill, 1982) 753-61, argues for that the Persian motif is derived from Daniel, but see the refutation of his argument by Mary Boyce, "On the Antiquity of Zoroastrian Apocalyptic," BSOAS 47 (1984) 71-72.

interpret the king's dream, while the Chaldean wise men fail. The king reacts with admiration to this feat, but pays no attention whatever to the content of the interpretation, which might have been expected to cause him consternation. The revelation of mystery, rather than imminent divine intervendon, is the focus of the story. The eschatological implications of the dream are muted by the context in which it is placed. In this regard, Daniel 2 contrasts sharply with the use of the four kingdom topos in Daniel 7. In the latter chapter, the dream is Daniel's own, and the Babylonian setting recedes into the background. Instead the attention of the reader, like that of Daniel himself, is focused on the fourth beast and its imminent destruction In Daniel 2, however, the fictive setting in the reign of Nebuchadnezzar is a crucial element. Consequently we are invited to consider the dream from the perspective of the king. To be sure, his kingdom will pass, but its destruction is not imminent. The irruption of the kingdom of God is still in far in the future, in the time of a later kingdom. The lack of emphasis on the eschatological element in Daniel 2 should not be taken to indicate that eschatology is extraneous to these stories, and the result of redactional activity. Indeed, if a redactor had introduced an eschatological perspective to Daniel 2 we should expect that he would have placed more emphasis on it. Rather, we must recognize that eschatology has an integral place in the tales of Daniel 1-6, although it is far less important here than in chaps. 7-12. The crucial concept is that of the sovereignty or kingship of God. In Daniel 2, when Daniel has interpreted the dream, Nebuchadnezzar confesses that "your God is God of gods and lord of kings" (2:47). Later he proclaims that "his kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and his dominion endures through all generations" (3:33, compare 4:31; 6:27). This sovereignty is exercised in the present through the agency of Gentile kings. From a Jewish perspective, this arrangement could not be permanent. It is a theme of Daniel 1-6 that human kingdoms are transitory. Gentile monarchs bring about their downfall by hybris and idolatry, a point most vividly illustrated in Daniel 5 in the story of Belshazzar's feast. The destruction of the statue in Daniel 2 bespeaks the end of idolatry as well as of Gentile power. From this perspective, the ultimate kingdom set up by the God of heaven is only the corollary, and final fulfillment, of the sovereignty of the Most High, which even Nebuchadnezzar acknowledges in the present. The eschatology of Daniel 2 complements the theme of divine sovereignty in the present, and does not contradict it.

The eschatological hope of Daniel 1-6, however, is not urgent. For the present, Daniel is content to serve the Gentile overlords to whom the Most High had given the kingdom. Consequendy, the author tones down the revolutionary implications of the "four kingdom" schema by placing it in a context where its fulfillment does not appear imminent. The final kingdom of God is assured, but not imminent. Eschatology is not denied, but deferred. Deferred eschatology was arguably typical of much of post-exilic Judaism, between the decline of prophecy and the rise of apocalypticism. Such an attitude is compatible with the perspective of the books of Chronicles or of Sirach, which were written in the land of Israel. The most natural Sitz-im-Leben for the stories in Daniel, however, is in the Diaspora, where they are ostensibly set. The deferral of eschatological hope is part of a strategy for maintaining Jewish life in a Gentile environment, even in the service of Gentile kings. It makes it possible for Jews such as Daniel to reconcile temporary loyalty to Gentile monarchs with their permanent loyalty to the Most High God. As such, the muted eschatological perspective of Daniel 2 is an integral part of the religio-political ideology of these Aramaic tales.

C H A P T E R NINE

S T I R R I N G UP T H E G R E A T SEA The Religio-Historical Background of Daniel 7 It is now more than a century since Hermann Gunkel published his ground-breaking study Schöpfung und Chaos, in which he traced the influence of ancient Near Eastern mythology in various biblical texts, including Daniel chapter 7,' Gunkel began with the observation that certain features of the vision were not explained in the interpretation, e.g., why the beasts rise out of the sea, or the one like a son of man comes with the clouds of heaven. He further noted that this imagery had traditional associations, and pointed to a string of passages in the Hebrew Bible and post-biblical Jewish texts where monsters from the sea represent powers which are hostile to God: Isa 27:1; 30:7; Ezek 29; 32; Pss. 68:31; 74:13; 87:4; Pss. Sol 2:2. These passages imply a mythic narrative which is not to be found in the Hebrew Bible, but Gunkel claimed to have found its prototype in the Babylonian creation story, the Enuma Elish. Gunkel's general insight, that the imagery of the beasts from the sea alludes to a fuller narrative, whose prototype must be sought outside the Hebrew Bible, has been widely accepted, 2 while it has also met with considerable resistance. 3 The view that this prototype is found in the Enuma Elish is no longer defended, as it was to a great degree rendered obsolete by the discovery of the Ugaritic texts in 1929.4 Within a few years of that discovery, the relevance of the 1

Hermann Gunkel, Schöpfung und Chaos in Urzeit und Endzeit. Eine religionsgeschichtliche Untersuchung über Gen 1 und Ap Joh 12 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1895). Daniel 7 is discussed in pp. 323-35. 2 For succinct reviews of scholarship see Carsten Colpe, "ho huios tou anthröpou," TDNT 8 (1968) 406-20, Klaus Koch, Das Buch Daniel (Erträge der Forschung; Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1980) 230-34. 3 E.g. J . A. Montgomery, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Daniel (ICC; New York: Scribners, 1927) 323, L.F. Hartman and A.A. DiLella, The Book of Daniel (Anchor Bible 23; Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1978)212; M.P. Casey, Son of Man. The Interpretation and Influence of Daniel 7 (London: SPCK, 1979) 35-38. Arthur J . Ferch, The Son of Man in Daniel Seven (Andrews University Seminary Doctoral Dissertation Series; Berrien Springs: Andrews University Press, 1979) 40-107; Chrys C. Caragounis, The Son ofMan (WUNT 38; Tübingen: Mohr, 1986) 36-41. * In the early part of the twentieth century, Iranian backgrounds for apocalypticism were in vogue. See Koch, Das Buch Daniel, 231-33. Since these no longer figure in the discussion of Daniel 7 we will not discuss them here.

Ugaritic material for Daniel 7 was noted by Otto Eissfeldt,5 who saw the fourth beast of Daniel 7 as a reflection of the chaos monster Lotan. A more influential proposal was made by John Emerton in 19586 (and independently by Leonhard Rost in the same year)7. Emerton argued that the juxtaposition of the man-like figure who comes with the clouds and the divine "Ancient of Days" derives from Canaanite mythology, where Baal, the rider of the clouds, is subordinate to El, the father of years. The proposed Ugaritic background of Daniel 7 derived support from the influential article of Carsten Colpe on "ho huios tou anthropou" in TDNT, and it has subsequently been endorsed by several scholars, although it also remains a matter of lively debate. 8 Recendy a new element has been injected into the debate by Helge Kvanvig, in a learned and original study that revives the claims of a Mesopotamian background, but with reference to the seventh century BCE "Vision of the Underworld" rather than to the Enuma Elish.9 Kvanvig's proposal has some prima facie attractiveness, since the first six chapters of Daniel are set in Babylon, and BabyIonian parallels have figured prominently in the discussion of other early apocalyptic texts.10 It also provides a new focus for questions about the criteria for determining religio-historical parallels, and about the significance of these parallels for understanding a text. 5 Otto Eissfeldt, Baal Ζaphon, Zeus Kasios und der Durchzug der Israeliten durchs Meer (Halle: Niemeyer, 1932) 25-30. 6 J A. Emerton, "The Origin of the Son of Man Imagery," JTS 9 (1958) 225-42. 7 Leonhard Rost, "Zur Deutung des Menschensonnes in Daniel 7," in G. Delling, ed., Gott und die Götter. FestgabefiirErich Fascher zum 60. Geburtstag (Berlin: Evangelische Verlag, 1958) 41-3. A. Bcntzcn, Daniel (HAT 19; 2nd ed., Tübingen: Mohr, 1952) 58-65; King and Messiah (2nd ed.; Oxford: Blackwcll, 1970) 73-75. argued that Daniel 7 was an adaptation of the supposed pre-exilic Thronbesteigungsfest, or festival of the enthronement of Yahweh, and included motifs of Canaanite origin, although he also endorsed the view that the "Son of M a n " was the primal man. 8 J.J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Daniel (HSM 16; Missoula, Montana: Scholars Press, 1977) 95-106; J . Day, God's Conflict with the dragon and the sea (University of Cambridge Oriental Publications 35; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985) 151-78; J. Goldingay, Daniel (Word Biblical Commentary; Dallas: Word, 1989) 151. 9 H. Kvanvig, Roots ofApocalypt1c(\VM.ANJ 61; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1988) 389-441. The vision was originally published by E. Ebcling, Tod und Leben nach den Vorstellungen der Babylonier (Berlin & Leipzig: de Gruytcr, 1931) 1-19 and re-edited by W. von Soden, "Die Unterweltsvision eines assyrischen Krönprinzen," Ze',sc^nft fi'r Assyriologie 9 (1936) 1-31 (= Aus Sprache, Geschichte und Religion Babyloniens. Gesammelte Aufsätze [Naples:Istituto Universitario Orientale, 1989] 29-67). English translations can bc found in Kvanvig, Roots of Apocalyptic, 390-91 and in AMT109-110 (E. A. Speiser). 10 Sec e.g. J . VanderKam, Enoch and the Growth of an Apocalyptic Tradition (CBQMS 16; Washington, D. C.: Catholic Biblical Association, 1984).

A few preliminary matters may be addressed at the outset. On the most elementary level, it should be clear that the parallels are of significance for the sense of the text, rather than for its reference. Gunkel was not suggesting that the pious Jews of the Maccabean era were looking to Marduk for deliverance, but that familiarity with the Enuma Elish can help us better understand how they envisaged their situation. T o say that the one like a son of man "is" Marduk, or the Canaanite Baal, pertains to a different level of meaning than the claim that he should be identified as the archangel Michael or as a symbol for the Jewish people. It is to say that he functions in a manner similar to the way Marduk, or Baal, functions in the pagan myths. This distinction is elementary, but is sometimes missed by those who polemicize against religio-historical parallels.11 Second, some critics demand "congeniality in ideological standpoint between the presumed background and the author of our text," 12 with the implication that pagan mythology is in principle not congenial to the work of a pious Jew. This formulation of the issue assumes that the ideological standpoint of the text is clear-cut, and risks confusing what is congenial to the text with what is congenial to the critic.13 Appropriation of foreign motifs and thought patterns requires that some aspect of the presumed background be congenial to the author, but does not require identity of outlook. In Daniel 1-6, Daniel is cast in the model of the Babylonian wise-men, although his religious ideology is fundamentally different from theirs. By positing an area of similarity between Daniel and the Chaldeans, the authors of the tales are able to assert the superiority of Daniel and his God. Similarly, the use of imagery associated with Marduk or with Baal may serve to make the claim that Yahweh, not the pagan deities, is the true deliverer. Whether pagan myths constitute the background to Daniel 7 must be judged by the light they throw on the text, not pre-judged by modern assumptions about what is permissible for an ancient Jew.

11 E.g. Ferch, The Son of Man, 64, contends that "the sea and the beasts of Dan 7 are interpreted as the earth and four kings or kingdoms and not as chaos symbols." T o say that the beasts are chaos symbols is in no way incompatible with the interpretation as kings or kingdoms, since it pertains to a différent level of meaning. 12 Caragounis, The Son of Man, 38. 13 Casey, Son of Man, 18, allows that the imagery may have Canaanite roots, but insists that "from the author's own perspective...he was drawing on native Israelite imagery as a conservative defender of the faith might be expected to." Pre-conceived expectations about what imagery a conservative defender of the faith may use takes precedence here over the actual usage of the contemporary Jewish texts (e.g. 1 Enoch) which draw freely on material of diverse origins.

Perhaps the main methodological problem in determining religiohistorical influences concerns the degree of correspondence that must be found between the ancient myth and biblical text. Parallels, of course, are of various kinds. Some may concern isolated points. For example, the representation of the kingdoms of Persia and Greece by a ram and a he-goat has been explained from the signs of the Zodiac and their correlation with specific nations in Hellenistic times.14 T h e astral background, however, does not illuminate the action described in Daniel 8, the defeat of the ram and the subsequent blasphemous career of the little horn. Other parallels are structural in nature, and explain the way a complex of motifs is organized. So Kvanvig claims that the "Vision of the Netherworld" provided a model for Daniel 7 as a whole, and a similar claim can be made for the Baal myth from Ugarit. 15 It has been argued that motifs should not be "torn out of their living contexts" but "should be considered against the totality of the phenomenological conception of the works in which such correspondences occur." 16 Such demands are justified when the objective is to compare the overall message of the myth and the biblical text, but this has never been the issue in the discussion of Daniel 7. Literary influence necessarily involves tearing motifs, or patterns, from one context and transferring them to another. In fact, the richness of the allusion depends precisely on the tension between the two different contexts. T o take a familiar example, there is no doubt that Mark 13:26 ("then they will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory") is influenced by Daniel 7. The Markan passage reproduces very little of Daniel's vision: it is not presented as a dream or a vision, there is no mention of the sea, or beasts, or the Ancient of Days. Yet the particularity of the description of the Son of Man is only intelligible if we catch the allusion to Daniel. T h e allusion is assured by the fact that a few motifs are clustered together (Son of Man, clouds, power and glory), but the correspondence is by no means complete. Mark 13 represents a reinterpretation, and therefore an alteration, of Daniel 7 rather than a reproduction.

14

A. Caquot, "Sur les auatre Bêtes de Daniel VII," Semitica 5(1955) 5-13. See also P. Porter, Metaphors and Monsters. A Literaiy-Critical Study of Daniel 7 and 8 (Coniectanea Biblica O T series 20; Lund: Glcerup, 1983), who attempts to explain the animal imagery in Daniel from the root metaphor of "shepherd." 16 A.J. Ferch, "Daniel 7 and Ugarit: A Reconsideration," JBL 99(1980) 75; citing Claus Westermann, "Sinn und Grenze religionsgeschichtlichcr Parallelen," 7X< 90(1965) 490-91 and Nahum Sarna, Understanding Genesis (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1966) xxvii. 15

On the other hand, for a significant structural parallel it is not enough that there be some resemblance between individual motifs. First, the manner in which the motifs are related to each other, and function within their context, is crucial. Not all the "Son of Man" sayings in the Gospels are necessarily related to Daniel 7. Second, while the two contexts are necessarily different, there must be some point of analogy between them, so that the use of the older text becomes appropriate and helpful. Mark 13 and Daniel 7 are linked by the fact that both are scenes of public eschatology and envisage a great historical crisis and its resolution. We must allow, however, that whoever composed Daniel 7 was a creative author, not a mere copyist of ancient sources. It should be no surprise that his composition is a new entity, discontinuous in some respects with all its sources. What is significant is whether the analogy with ancient myths throws light on the particular choice of motifs in Daniel's vision, and on the way in which those motifs are combined. The Canaanite background The Ugaritic material that is of primary interest for Daniel 7 is found in the Baal cycle (CTA 1-6) and more specifically in the conflict between Baal and Yamm (CTA 2). It must be emphasized that no one suggests that the author of Daniel knew this myth in the precise formulation found at Ugarit. The argument is similar to Gunkel's appeal to the Enuma Elish: the myth of Baal and Yamm is one formulation of a traditional narrative presupposed in Daniel 7, and can throw light on the choice of imagery and structure of relationships in the biblical text. According to the Ugaritic myth, Yamm/Sea sends an embassy to the high god El to demand that Baal be given over to him. The gods are intimidated, and El is willing to comply, but Baal resists. A struggle between Baal and Yamm ensues. Baal is aided by the craftsman Kothar-wa-Khasis who tells him: Truly I say to you, Ο Prince Baal, I repeat (to you) Ο Rider of the Clouds: Now your enemy, Baal, now your enemy you will smite, now you will smite your foe. You will take your everlasting kingdom, your dominion for ever and ever.

Kothar-wa-Khasis then gives Baal magical clubs, with which he attacks and kills Yamm. Astarte instructs Baal to scatter Yamm, and when that is done there is a cry: "Yamm is indeed dead! Baal shall be king." This last declaration and the words of Kothar-wa-Khasis to Baal make clear that what is at stake in the conflict is kingship

among the gods. This kingship, however, is subject to that of El, as high god. Baal appears in harmonious subordination to El in a text published in Ugaútica V: "El sits next to Astarte, El the judge next to Hadad the shepherd." 17 The view that Baal's kingship was subject to El is also reflected in the Phoenician history of Philo Byblios who says that "Zeus Demarous, who is Hadad, king of the gods" reigned by the consent of Kronos (E1).IR When Baal succumbs to Mot (Death) in another episode of the cycle, El appoints Athtar as king in his place (CTA 6.1.43-65). The conflict for universal kingship constitutes the first point of analogy between this myth and Daniel 7. In Daniel, the four beasts are kings or kingdoms, who are stripped of their dominion, while the "one like a son of man" receives everlasting dominion and a kingship that shall never be destroyed. Beyond this general analogy in context, there are parallels in a number of motifs and in the relationships between them. Daniel's vision begins with the statement that "the four winds of heaven were stirring up the great sea." Out of this sea, four great beasts arise, but the sea is the source, and the beasts are its offshoots. There is no further reference to the sea in Daniel 7, and its presence in the vision must be explained from its traditional associations. Gunkel already noted the depiction of the sea in Hebrew poetry, as a force that has to be subdued by God and is associated with the monsters Rahab and Leviathan (who appears at Ugarit as Lotan, the twisting serpent). In view of the frequency of allusions to this tradition within the bible,19 there can be little doubt that the sea in Daniel 7 should also be understood in this context. The tradition is ultimately of Canaanite origin, but the symbolism of the sea is familiar from the Hebrew Bible, and does not in itself require direct acquaintance with Canaanite sources. Gunkel's most important insight has been vindicated, however. T o say that beasts arise from the sea is not simply to say that kings will arise on the earth, despite the interpretation in Dan 7:17. The imagery implies that the kings have a metaphysical status. They are the embodiments of the 17

J . Nougayrol et al., Ugantica V(Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1968) 2.2b-3a. "‫ י‬Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica 1.10.31. A.I. Baumgarten, The Phoenician History of Philo of Byblos. A Commentary (Études Préliminaires aux Religions Orientales dans l'Empire Romain; Leiden: Brill, 1981) 217-19, emphasizes the différences between the portrayals of EI in the Ugaritic texts and in Philo, but concludes: "while comparisons between Ugaritic and Byblian El...are hazardous it would seem that the traditions about El in these two cities were similar. In the mythology of both towns El delegated authority to the younger gods while retaining ultimate and unchallenged supremacy for himself." 19 E.g. J o b 26,12-13; Ps 89,8-11; Isa 17,12-14; 51,9-10.

primeval power of chaos symbolized by the sea in Hebrew and Canaanite tradition. 20 The depiction of the beasts in Daniel is drawn from other sources, but the source from which they rise, and so the dominant image in the opening part of Daniel's vision, has its ultimate origin in Canaanite myth. The other complex of motifs in Daniel 7 that recalls Canaanite imagery concerns the "one like a son of man" and the Ancient of Days. Emerton observed the significance of the entourage of clouds, which normally denotes divine status in ancient Israel: the act of coming with clouds suggests a theophany of Yahwe himself. If Dan. vii. 13 does not refer to a divine being, then it is the only exception out of about seventy passages in the OT. 21

Yet in Daniel 7 the one who comes with clouds is clearly subordinate to the Ancient of Days. This configuration has no precedent in the biblical tradition. It is quite intelligible, however, against the background of Canaanite mythology, where Baal appears in subordination to El.22 Moreover the descriptions of the two figures have affinities with the Canaanite gods. Baal's stock epithet in the Ugaritic texts is "rider of the clouds." 23 El is called ab mm, which is most frequently, and plausibly, taken as abû šānīma, father of years,24 and is similar in sense to "Ancient of Days." Admittedly, the meaning of this phrase is disputed, 25 and in any case it is a different epithet from what we find in Daniel. There is no dispute, however, that El is portrayed as an aged god in the Ugaritic

20 Compare A. Lacocque, The Book of Daniel (Atlanta: Knox, 1979) 138: "The nations proceed from chaos and arc the works of chaos." Kvanvig, Roots, 503-05, fully appreciates this point, although he favors a difFercnt derivation of the symbolism. In contrast, the point is missed by Ferch, "Daniel 7 and Ugarit," 81 ("The sea and the beasts are interpreted as the earth and four kings or kingdoms and not as chaos symbols"). This is to ignore the associations of the imagery even within the biblical context. It should be noted that Kvanvig, Roots, 505, understands the "earth" of Dan 7:17 in a mythological sense, as the underworld. 21 Emerton, "The Origin," 231-32. Cf. Deut 33,26; Pss 68,5; 104,3. 22 CTA 2.1.21, Ugaritica F2.2b-3a, cited above. 23 The objection of Kvanvig, Roots, 507-08, that clouds were commonly associated with vegetation gods and not specific to Baal, is disingenuous, as he does not suggest any other vegetation god that is more relevant to Daniel. The "Vision of the Netherworld," which he proposes as background has no place for such a figure. 24 CTA 1.3.24; 4.4.24; 6.1.36; 17.6.49. The phrase is taken as "father of years" by Rost, "Zur Deutung des Menschensohnes," 42; F.M. Cross, Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1973) 16; Day, God's Conflict, 161, among others. 25 M. Pope, El in the Ugaritic Texts (Leiden: Brill, 1955) 33, suggests "father of exalted ones." O. Eissfeldt, El im ugaritischen Pantheon (Leipzig: Akademie Verlag, 1951) 30, proposed "father of mortals," while Cyrus H. Gordon, "El, Father of

texts,26 and that Daniel 7 is exceptional in the Hebrew Bible in depicting God in this way. The epithets of El also include that of "judge," 27 and he is attended by a divine council of the bn qds, "sons of the holy one." 28 There are, of course, also important differences between Daniel 7 and the Ugaritic myth. Daniel speaks of four beasts which come up out of the sea. The Canaanite myth is thus adapted to accommodate the schema of four kingdoms, which is already found in Daniel chap. 2. Second, the beast is not slain in combat, as was the case with Lotan and Yamm in the myth. Instead it is executed in a judicial assembly. We have here a distinctively Jewish adaptation of the myth, which emphasizes the sovereignty of the supreme God. In older texts of the biblical tradition, Yahweh is said to slay the dragon (Isa 51:9; 27:1). Here the executioner is not specified, but the sentence is presumably passed by the Ancient of Days. Since the "one like a son of man" receives dominion after the death of the beast, it is reasonable to assume that he has in some way triumphed over it. The importance of the judgment scene here may be related to the growing importance of the idea of a final judgment in the apocalyptic literature of the Hellenistic period. Despite these differences between the Ugaritic texts and Daniel 7, the main ingredients of the biblical vision are already found in the ancient myths. What is important is the pattern of relationships: the opposition between the sea and the rider of the clouds, the presence of two god-like figures and the fact that one who comes with the clouds receives everlasting dominion. These are the relationships which determine the structure of the vision in Daniel 7. The old story has been given a new literary form, and adapted to fit a new historical situation, but the basic structure persists. Kvanvig's proposal Kvanvig5s proposal differs from those of Gunkel and Emerton in so far as it posits the dependence of Daniel 7 on a specific Akkadian text, the "Vision of the Netherworld." This text is introduced as "a night vision" or "dream." The dreamer finds himself in the Sunem," JNES 35 (1976) 261-62 took šnm as the name of a god. None of these suggestions has proven persuasive. See Day, God's Conflict, 161. The plural of "years" in Ugaritic is usually mt rather than mm , but this objection is not decisive as other words have variant plural forms (e.g. r% head). 26 CTA 4.5.65-6: "You are great, El, you are indeed wise, the grey hairs of your beard indeed instruct you." (cf. CTA 3.5.10). See Cross, Canaanite Myth, 16-17. 27 Ugaritica F2.2b-3a, citcd above. 28 CTA 2.1.21.

Netherworld, where he sees 15 gods who have hybrid forms (e.g. one has the head of a lion, hands of men and feet of a bird). He also sees "one man" whose face was "similar to that of an Anzu bird" and who was armed with a sword and a bow. Then he sees "the warrior Nergal" on a royal throne, surrounded by the Annunaki, the great gods, with lightning flashing from his arms. The god is about to put him to death, but the divine counsellor intervenes. Nergal then rebukes him for dishonoring the queen of the Netherworld. He tells him that this [spirit] which you saw in the nether world, is that of the exalted shepherd: to whom my father...the king of the gods, gives full responsibility...

He goes on to speak of "your begetter, ...wise in speech, broad in understanding" who nonetheless "closed his ear for his sp[ee]ch, ate the taboo and stamped on the abomination" and threatens to "throw you down to the winds." 29 After the dreamer awakes, the account concludes with a third person account of how he praised Nergal and Ereshkigal, and how the scribe resolved to do always what Nergal commanded. Kvanvig claims that this vision shares with Daniel 7 basic features of both form and content. As regards form, it is true that both are dream visions, and both have similar "frames" (introductory and concluding statements) in the manner typical of Near Eastern dream accounts. 30 The dreams, however, are of different types. Daniel 7 is a symbolic dream, which is followed by an interpretation. The "Vision of the Netherworld" is a "message dream" which culminates in a speech by the god to the visionary, which requires no interpretation. 31 Unlike Daniel, the dreamer in the vision is involved in the action of the dream. 32 Formally the Akkadian vision is of great 29 This passage of the dream is problematic, largely because of a lacuna before the reference to "your begetter." Kvanvig interprets the "exalted shepherd" as an "ideal king" with whom the father of the visionary is contrasted. The threat at the end applies to both the visionary and his father. Speiser's translation, in contrast, implies that the "exalted shepherd" is identical with the visionary's father. Kvanvig identifies the visionary as a son of King Esarhaddon (680-669 BCE). 30 A.L. Oppenheim, The Interpretation of Dreams in the Ancient Near East (Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1956) 187. 31 Oppenheim, ibid., 185. Kvanvig, Roots of Apocalyptic, 445, tries to blur the distinction by claiming that the Akkadian dream also has a symbolic feature in so far as the "one man" is interpreted as the "ideal king." In fact the man is identified as the king, but his human form is realistic, not symbolic. 32 Again, Kvanvig attempts to blur the difference by claiming that "Daniel moves in front of the throne to ask for the interpretation of the vision." (Roots of Apocalyptic, 446). In fact Daniel is not said to move in front of the throne. He acts

interest for the background of early Jewish apocalypses, but is more relevant to the otherworldly journeys of Enoch than to the symbolic vision of Daniel. Much closer formal models for Daniel 7 can be found in the dreams in chaps. 2 and 4, or even in the less developed "night visions" of Zechariah. Moreover, while the motif of kingship appears in the Akkadian vision, it is primarily concerned with the fate of the individual visionary himself. There is no such concern in Daniel 7, and it is difficult to see any analogy in theme between the two visions. Kvanvig compares the pattern of content of the two visions under five headings: 1 Action of nature (the winds and the sea in Daniel). It is admitted that there is no parallel at this point. 33 2 The "monsters. " Daniel describes four beasts. Whether the 15 gods of the vision are really analogous is questionable. The point of comparison is that both are hybrid in form, and some of the same constituent parts occur in both, but not in the same combination. 34 What this suggests is that the conception of the beasts in Daniel is influenced in a general way by the hybrid forms which are typical not only of this text but of Mesopotamian mythology and art in general. 3 God on the throne. In both visions a god is seated for judgment and surrounded by attendants and by fire. The significance of this parallel is diminished, however, by the fact that fire is very frequently associated with theophanies and Near Eastern gods are commonly surrounded by their council.35 The location of the

within the dream, to ask for the interpretation, but this action is outside the frame of the symbolic vision. 33 Kvanvig, Roots, 503-05, docs, however, propose a Mesopotamian background for the sea: "In Mesopotamian mythology Apsu, the subterranean water-deep, was regarded as the abode of strange composite creatures of different kinds. These could be of benevolent or malevolent character." Kvanvig's understanding of the imagery is influenced by the fact that he regards the vision of the man from the sea in 4 Ezra 13 as independent of Daniel 7, and as an instance where a benevolent character rises from the sea. Most scholars, however, see 4 Ezra 13 as derived from Daniel 7, and not as an independent witness to the symbolism of the sea, which is entirely malevolent in Daniel. 34 E.g. the first beast in Daniel 7 is a lion with eagles wings. It is made to stand on 2 feet and is given a human heart. In the "Vision," one god is a lion standing on its hind-legs, and several have lion heads, while a god with no lion features has wings. There is no mention of a human heart. Kvanvig, Roots, 536-37, exaggerates the correspondence by combining features from different gods as parallels to individual beasts. 35 Kvanvig, Roots, 445: "Such visions of the supreme god, sitting on his throne, surrounded by attendants, are well attested in Old Testament and Jewish texts, as well as in Mesopotamia."

scene in the Netherworld constitutes a significant point of difference over against Daniel. 4 The judgment. In both visions the god acts as judge, but that is the extent of the parallel. In Daniel the one being judged is a beast from the sea, in the "Vision" it is the visionary himself.36 The accusation in Daniel is not stated explicidy, but is presumably related to the "great words" the horn was speaking. The accused in the Vision does not display any similar defiance. In Daniel the beast is slain, in the Vision there is a reprieve. 5 The ideal ruler, designated as a man. This is the most dubious of all the analogies proposed by Kvanvig. Daniel 7 announces the coming of "one like a son of man" who stands in contrast to the beasts from the sea. He is an ideal ruler in the sense that he receives the eschatological kingdom. There is no analogous figure in the Akkadian vision. There the dreamer is told that the man he saw in the dream is "the exalted shepherd...to whom the king of the gods gives full responsibility...' ‫י‬3‫ ד‬but he is evidendy an historical king whose reign is either present or already past. 38 In no case is the Assyrian king given everlasting dominion. The expression "one man" (isten etlu) appears in several Akkadian dream reports. 39 The role of this figure can vary. In some cases he comes to the aid of the dreamer (e.g. Gilgamesh) but he does not act in the "Vision of the Netherworld," and it is not apparent that he is an intermediary between gods and men. 40 All that can be inferred from the phrase is that it was frequendy used for significant figures in dreams. In biblical visions, too, human figures often appear (Dan 8:15; 9:21; 10:5, etc.). Here again the parallel between the two visions is quite limited and of a general nature. Kvanvig has argued that the parallels between Daniel and the Akkadian Vision "indicate a dependence" since "they occur in two night-visions with the same sequence of basic content." 41 This claim involves considerable exaggeration. Both visions involve hybrid beings, a human figure, a god on his throne and a judgment scene. 36 Kvanvig describes the accused in both visions as a "rebel king'1 but this is to obscure fundamental differences. 37 von Soden and Speiser read the verb in the past tense. 38 Kvanvig, Roots, 433, identifies him as Sennacherib. Speiser's translation implies that he is identical with the visionary's father. 39 Kvanvig, Roots, 415. Examples are found in the dreams of Gilgamesh, the death dream of Enkidu, the dreams of the righteous sufferer in Ludlul Bel Nemeqi and a dream ofNabonidus (ANET 309-10). 40 Contra Kvanvig, Roots, 421. The expression refers to dead humans in a number of cases. 41 Kvanvig, Roots, 457.

T h e pattern of relationships between these elements, however, is entirely different in the two visions. In Daniel the hybrid beings are beasts from the sea and are in opposition to the human figure and the enthroned god. In the Akkadian Vision, they are gods and not in opposition to any of the other parties. The human figure contrasts with the hybrid gods, as a different kind of being, but he is not in conflict with them and does not in any sense triumph over them. In the Akkadian vision the one accused in the judgment scene is the visionary himself. The visions have a very different setting: the Akkadian one is in the Netherworld. The theme of the two passages is also quite different: Daniel is concerned with universal kingship, the "Vision" with the fate of the visionary. The comparison between the Vision of the Netherworld and Daniel 7 breaks down precisely at those crucial structural points where the analogy with Canaanite myth was most helpful. The Akkadian text has neither sea nor clouds; there is no opposition between the hybrid gods and the human figure, no destruction of a monster and no conferral of everlasting dominion. The Canaanite myth provides a much better explanation for the configuration of the key motifs in Daniel 7. It is also more directly relevant to the central theme of universal kingship. The transmission of the Canaanite material T h e most persistent objection to the view that Daniel 7 is influenced by Canaanite mythology concerns the long interval between the date of the Ugaritic texts (14th century BCE) and the composition of Daniel. Given the paucity of our sources for Canaanite religion after Ugarit, and the highly selective nature of the biblical tradition, it is hardly surprising that the lines of transmission cannot be traced conclusively. We must be content to demonstrate the possibility that the author of Daniel had access to these traditions, whether through Jewish or gentile channels. An extensive attempt to reconstruct the background of Daniel 7 in later pagan traditions has been made by Rollin Kearns. 42 It is possible to demonstrate the continued vitality of the cult of Baal Haddad, the Baal of the Ugaritic texts, into the Christian era, 43 but we lack texts to fill out the traditions associated with the cult in the later period. Our most important literary source, the Phoenician History of Philo Byblius, certainly contains Canaanite traditions, but 42 43

R. Kearns, Vorfragen zur Chmtologie ///(Tübingen: Mohr, 1982) 3-82. Ibid., 46-57.

has reconceived them in Hellenistic categories, so that their recovery requires careful analysis.44 In any case the material in Philo sheds litde light on Daniel 7. Kearns has argued that the cult of Baal Haddad in Palestine had produced an eschatological, apocalyptic reformulation of the tradition, which was then taken up by Jewish writers.45 The existence of this pagan tradition, however, is inferred from the Jewish texts, Daniel 7 and 4 Ezra 13. It is not attested in any pagan source, and so is extremely hypothetical. The pagan cult introduced into Jerusalem by Antiochus Epiphanes is generally recognized to have involved the worship of Baal Shamem, whence several allusions involving the word šmm, make desolate, in Daniel. 46 Here again we know relatively little about the symbolism of the cult.47 Many scholars object that precisely because of the Canaanite background of the cult introduced by Epiphanes, the author of Daniel would not have used symbolism that was known to have any Canaanite associations.48 This argument is not as compelling as it may initially seem. Use of the imagery from another cult does not necessarily reflect any compromise with its practice. An author may borrow symbolism in order to polemicize against its source—Hosea's use of Canaanite imagery is a well-known case in point. Daniel's portrayal of Antiochus Epiphanes as (the litde horn on) the beast from the sea is all the more scathing if its mythological overtones are fully recognized, in view of the king's devotion to Baal Shamem/Zeus Olympius. Nonetheless, it is easier to suppose that the author of Daniel was using imagery which had long been at home in the religion of Israel. In fact, as we have seen, several aspects of this imagery are well 44 See Baumgarten, The Phoenician History, 265-66: "Philo has taken what were, in his time, recent versions of ancient Phoenician traditions. In the process of presenting them, Philo has revised them to make them fit his own personal theories." 45 Kearns, Vorfragen, III, 98-100. 46 Dan 8:13; 9:27; 11:31; 12:11. The role of Baal Shamem (identified with Zeus Olympius) corresponds to that of El rather than Baal/Haddad. See R.A. Oden, "Baal Shamem and El," CßQ,39 (1977) 457-73. 47 Zeus Olympius appears as a throned figure on the reverse of coins of Antiochus Epiphanes, but the imagery is not distinctive enough to warrant any conclusions. The thesis of J. Morgenstern, "The 'Son of Man' of Daniel 7:13f. A new interpretation," JBL 80 (1961) 65-77, that Daniel 7 reflects a reform of Tyrian solar religion by Antiochus Epiphanes, is universally rejected as too conjectural. See also his "The King-god among the Western Semites and the Meaning of Epiphanes," F T 10 (1960) 138-97. 48 E.g. P. Mosca, "Ugarit and Daniel 7: A Missing Link," Bib 67(1986)499: "I seriously doubt that the impeccably orthodox Jewish author of Daniel 7 would turn to such a source for inspiration..." One wonders by what canon "orthodoxy" was judged impeccable in the second century BCE. Daniel shows considerable freedom in drawing motifs and ideas from various sources, and the idea of resurrection, with

attested in the Hebrew Bible—the chaotic sea, with its monsters, the rider of the clouds, the heavenly council.49 The one point that is difficult to reconcile with the biblical tradition is the juxtaposition of two apparently divine figures, the one like a son of man and the Ancient of Days. Otto Eissfeldt argued that a few biblical passages show Yahweh as distinct from and subordinate to El Elyon.50 In Deut 32,8 Elyon is said to divide the nations according to the number of the sons of El,51 and Israel falls to Yahweh's portion. In Ps 82 God (elohim) stands in the council of El and reminds the gods that they are all "sons of Elyon." These passages certainly testify to a fuller mythology in ancient Israel than is normally acknowledged in the Hebrew Bible. Whether either passage necessarily understands Yahweh as subordinate to Elyon is questionable. 52 It is unlikely, in any case, that such an understanding would have persisted down to the time when Daniel was written. It is interesting to note, however, that the Melchizedek scroll from Qumran understands the 'elôhîm of Ps 82 to refer, not to Yahweh, but to Melchizedek, a heavenly being subordinate to Yahweh. 53 The old mythology has been adapted so that there is no doubt of the supremacy of Yahweh, while some functions assigned to Yahweh in the older texts are now assigned to an angel. We do not know when this kind of adaptation was introduced into the Jewish tradition. It may well be presupposed in the juxtaposition of the "one like a son of man" and the Ancient of Days in Daniel 7. Many scholars have seen the Sitz-im-Leben of Canaanite mythology in Israelite religion in the royal cult.54 The most specific proposal in this regard has been offered by Paul Mosca, who claims to find in Ps 89 a crucial link between the Canaanite mythology attested at Ugarit, on the one hand, and Daniel 7 on the other. The Psalm celebrates the incomparability of Yahweh in "the assembly of holy ones" and grounds his primacy in his control over "the swelling of the sea" (vs 10) and slaying of Rahab (vs 11). It proceeds to describe which the book culminates, was scarcely established orthodoxy at that time. 49 Mosca, "Ugarit and Daniel 7," 500-01, lists 16 points at which Daniel 7 has "a demonstrably biblical pedigree." 50 Otto Eissfeldt, "El and Yahweh," JSS 1 (1956) 25-37. 51 Hence LXX, "angels of God". See 4 Q D c u f (P. W. Skehan, "A Fragment of the Song of Moses from Qumran," BASOR 136 [1954] 12-15). M T reads "sons of Israel." 52 See Emerton, "The Origin of the Son of Man Imagery," 241. 53 11 QMelch 2:9-10. Paul J . Kobelski, Melchizedek and Melchireša' (Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series 10; Washington D.C.: Catholic Biblical Association, 1981) 8. 54 E.g. Bentzen, Daniel, 64; Emerton, "The Origin of the Son of Man Imagery," 240-42. Goldingay, Daniel, 151, thinks rather of learned circlcs in Judaism.

his throne (vs 15) and proclaim his kingship (vs 19). Thus far we can see a parallel between Yahweh in the Psalm and Baal's victory over Yamm in the Ugaritic texts. Mosca, however, argues that Yahweh is assimilated to El and that the role of Baal is transferred to the Davidic king, of whom it is said, in vs 26, "I will set his hand upon the sea, his right hand upon the rivers." The king is God's son,55 as Baal is son of El, and he too is granted everlasting dominion (vss 30, 37).56 We see here many of the ingredients of Daniel's vision, presented as the indirect report of a vision (vs 20). There is also other evidence that the Davidic king was regarded as an 'elôhîm under Yahweh: he is addressed as such in Ps 45:7.57 While none of this provides a clear prototype for the scene in Daniel 7, it shows that many of the motifs associated with the Baal myth were adapted to Israelite religion in the period of the monarchy. 58 There can be no doubt that many more mythological traditions were transmitted in Second Temple Judaism than are now extant in the Hebrew Bible.59 Glimpses of such traditions can be seen in the so-called "Apocalypse of Isaiah," which alludes to Leviathan (27:1), the destruction of Mot, or Death (25:8), and an enigmatic punishment of the host of heaven (24:21-23). Other mythological traditions come to light in the extra-biblical apocalypses such as 1 Enoch and in the Dead Sea Scrolls, and it is generally agreed that all this material was not created de novo in the Hellenistic period. 60 The possibility that Daniel 7 drew on more extensive traditions than are now attested in the Hebrew Bible, and which were ultimately of 55

Ps 89,27-28. Compare Pss 2,7; 110,3. Mosca also construes Ps 89,37-38 ("His line shall continue forever, and his throne endure before me like the sun. It shall be established forever like the moon, an enduring witness in the skies.") to mean that the Davidic throne is "in the skies" but it is easier to take it that the moon is in the skies, and that the point of comparison is the permanence of the throne. See Mosca, "Once Again the Heavenly Witness of Psalm 89:38 " JBL 105(1986) 27-37. 57 Ps 89 is much more modest in this regard. See Mosca, "Ugarit and Daniel 7," 513. 58 The gap can not be bridged by appeal to Ps 8, where ben 'ādām (the son of man, as a generic term for humanity in parallelism to 'en&‫ )ז‬is given supremacy over all creatures of land and sea, as the context there is reminiscent of Genesis 2 rather than of the Chaoskampf {pace Mosca, "Ugarit and Daniel 7," 516-17). 59 This point is made validly, though with exaggeration, by Margaret Barker, The Older Testament (London: SPCK, 1987). 60 Interest in ancient myths was a widespread phenomenon in the Hellenistic age, as witnessed by Philo of Byblos, Berossus of Babylon and the use of old Egyptian traditions in the Potter's Oracle (see Collins, The Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Daniel, 102-03). Mosca, "Ugarit and Daniel 7," 499, makes the apt observation that in each case the author turns to old traditions of his own culture, not that of his neighbor. This point lends weight to the view that the Canaanite traditions had been assimilated to Judaism long before the time of Daniel. 56

Canaanite origin, can hardly be disputed. Unfortunately, for the present we must be content with the possibility and hope that some future textual discoveries will clarify the exact channels by which this material was transmitted. The fact remains, however, that the ancient Canaanite myths provide the most adequate background for understanding the configuration of motifs which we find in Daniel 7. Conclusions In conclusion, I would like to draw attention to some of the implications of reading Daniel 7 against a background of Canaanite mythology. The first concerns the literary unity of Daniel 7. There is a long tradition, especially in German scholarship, that posits source divisions within the chapter, and would attribute the so-called "Son of Man psalm" to a different source than the vision of the beasts from the sea. Both the sea and the rider of the clouds have integral parts in the Canaanite myth. Any source division that separates the sea from the heavenly figures can hardly be credible. The second concerns the unity of the Book of Daniel. The religiohistorical background which we have posited for Daniel 7 is quite different from what we find in Daniel 1-6. T o be sure there is continuity, which indicates that the author of chap. 7 deliberately connected his vision with the older tales. The most obvious point of continuity is with the four-kingdom schema of chap. 2, and in a more general way with the theme of succession to world dominion, which is pervasive in chaps. l-6. fil The specific imagery with which the kingdom theme is filled out in Daniel 7, however, is no longer drawn from stories about Babylonian and Persian kings, but from old traditions that had probably been at home in the Jerusalem cult. This observation supports the view that Daniel 7 comes from a different time and historical context than chaps. 1-6.62 Perhaps the greatest significance of the mythic background, however, lies in its implications for the kind of literature we have in Daniel 7. These are not steno-symbols which can be decoded and discarded, as Norman Perrin would have it.63 Rather, the power of the vision lies in its evocation of a pattern which transcends any par61

The first beast of chap. 7, which was given a human heart, must also be related to the transformation of Nebuchadnezzar in chap. 4 (Kvanvig, Roots, 487). 62 It should be noted, however, that Daniel 7-12 draws traditions from many sources, and can not all be explained from a Canaanite background. 6 ‫" י‬Eschatology and Hermeneutics: Reflections on Method in the Interpretation of the New Testament," JBL 93(1974) 11.

ticular historical situation. From Daniel's perspective, the struggle between Antiochus Epiphanes and the Jews was a re-enactment of a primordial struggle between the chaotic forces of the Sea and the rider of the clouds, which had been recurring from time immemorial. It was therefore even more terrible than it might seem, but there were grounds for reassurance, since the outcome was known. Such a view of history could not be adequately articulated in plain prose, but required the symbolism most richly provided by the ancient myths.

T H E MEANING O F " T H E END" IN T H E B O O K O F DANIEL

Eschatology, discussion of "the end," is a topic of central importance in biblical studies, which continues to play a vital part in modern theology. Already in the eighth century BCE Amos declared, "The end has come upon my people Israel" (Amos 8:2). For Amos, the end in question was the end of Israel as an independent nation. Similarly, Ezekiel spoke of the "end" of Judah. While the classical prophets entertained expectations of definitive change, they did not expect an end of this world or of the historical process. Such ideas emerge in the apocalyptic literature, beginning in the early second century BCE, where we are told that "the world will be written down for destruction," and "the first heaven will vanish and pass away, and a new heaven will appear." 1 By the end of the first century CE expectation of an end of this world was widespread. The new heaven and new earth of Revelation entailed the passing away of the first heaven and earth (Rev 21:1). According to 4 Ezra 7:30 this world would be returned to primeval silence for seven days. The place of the Book of Daniel in this development is disputed. On the one hand, it is often regarded as the first instance of "true and explicit eschatology" in the Hebrew Bible.2 On the other hand, it never speaks of an end of this world, and one scholar has even suggested that its eschatology is no different from that of the Enthronement Psalms or of earlier prophecy. 3 Yet the later chapters of Daniel are dominated by the expectation of an "end" to a degree that has no parallel in the Psalms or earlier Prophets. Daniel is also exceptional, even among the ancient apocalypses, in attempting to calculate the exact time until that "end" would come. It is true that the more elaborate scenarios of later apocalypses such as 4 Ezra 1 1 Enoch 91:14, 16 (the Apocalypse of Weeks). Even here the historical process does not come to an end, since "after this there will be many weeks without number for ever..." (91:17). 2 J.P.M. van der Ploeg, "Eschatology in the Old Testament," OTS 17 (1972) 92. 3 Rex A. Mason, "The Treatment of Earlier Biblical Themes in the Book of Daniel," in James L Crenshaw, ed., Perspectives on the Hebrew Bible: Essays in Honor of Walter J. Harrelson (Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1988) 99.

should not be read back into Daniel, 4 but neither should the distinctivenes of Daniel over against the earlier Prophets be ignored. There is, moreover, evidence of development in the expectation of the end within Daniel 7-12, and it is important that all the evidence be taken into account. The word ‫קץ‬, end, occurs 14 times in Daniel 8-12. 5 Some of these occurrences are not immediately relevant to our discussion. In 9:26 and 11:45 "his end" refers to the death of Antiochus Epiphanes. In 11:6, 13 the reference is to the end of a period of years in the history of the Ptolemies and Seleucids. In the other instances, however, a more definitive end is in view. In four instances, 8:17, 19; 11:27, 35 there is an allusion to Hab 2:3, where ‫ קץ‬is linked with ‫מועד‬, appointed time. In 8:17; 11:35, 40; 12:4, 9 the expression is ‫עח קץ‬, time of the end. In 12:6 the end is specified as "the end of the wonders" and in 12:13 as "the end of the days." The word ‫ קץ‬is also used without qualification in 9:26 and 12: 13. The idea of an end is tied to the calculation of time in 12:6-7 where the "end of the wonders" is expected after "a time, times and half a time." The end and the kingdom The first attempt to calculate a definite period of time in Daniel is found in 7:25, which says that "the holy ones of the Most High" 6 will be given into the power of the little horn for "a time, times and half a time." In this case, the period of time in question is clearly the length of the persecution. At the end of this period the little horn will be condemned "to destruction and perdition until the end" (‫עד‬ ‫)סופא‬. "Until the end 5 ' here seems to mean that the destruction is 4

The tendency of older handbooks to produce a synthetic view of apocalyptic eschatology, based especially on 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch, is found occasionally in recent scholarship (e.g., the "Systematic Presentation" of Messianism in Emil Schuercr, The Histoiy of the Jewish People in the age of Jesus Christ [rev. and ed. Gcza Vermes, Fergus Millar and Matthew Black; Edinburgh: Clark, 1979] 2.514-47) but has been generally rejected in work of the last two decades. See my attempt to differentiate between the different apocalypses in "The Jewish Apocalypses," Semeia 14 (1979) 2159 and in The Apocalyptic Imagination (New York: Crossroad, 1984) passim; also Michael E. Stone, "Apocalyptic Literature" in M.E. Stone, ed., Jeivish Literature of the Second Temple Period (CRINT 2/2; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984) 383-441. Even Schucrer balances the systematic presentation with a historical survey which attempts to treat the material in chronological order (pp. 497-513). 5 The Aramaic equivalent, 0‫ופא‬, occurs twice in chap. 7. In ν 28 it indicates the end of the revelation. In ν 26 the beast is not condemned to be destroyed "until the end." 6 O r possibly "the most high Holy Ones." See André Lacocque, The Book of Daniel(Atlanta: Knox, 1979) 131;John Goldingay, "'Holy Ones on High' in Daniel 7:18," JBL 107 (1988) 495-97.

final, not that it will terminate at a certain point, and so the Aramaic word does not have the quasi-technical force that ‫ קץ‬acquires in the later chapters. The decisive point in Chapter 7 is expressed as a judgment scene. Thereafter the kingdom of the beast will be destroyed and the people of the holy ones will receive an everlasting kingdom. The motif of kingdoms in chap. 7 is taken over from chaps. 1 -6, which deal with the succession of Near Eastern kingdoms, and, in 2:44 with a final kingdom set up by God. In chap. 7 the kingdom is initially given to the holy ones, or angels (7:18),7 but also to "the people of the holy ones" (7:27) who will presumably rule on earth. Nothing is said of the nature of this kingdom. The essential point is that Israel will enjoy sovereignty over the other nations, and the visionary has simply not sketched out any details. Taken in isoladon, this eschatological kingdom is compatible with the expectations of the older Prophets, although it could be filled out in various ways. Chap. 7 is probably the oldest part of Daniel 7-12, since it is written in Aramaic (like the older tales) and makes no clear reference to the profanation of the temple, which figures prominently in chaps. 8-12. The end. and the temple In Chapter 8, the angel Gabriel explains to Daniel that "the vision is for the end time" (8:17) or for "the appointed time of the end" (8:19). Both phrases echo Hab 2:3: ‫כ י ע ו ד חזון ל מ ו ע ד ו י פ ח ל ק ץ ו ל א י כ ז ב‬

for the vision awaits its time; it hastens to the end, it will not lie. 8

The allusion to Habakkuk lends authority to the view that a vision has an appointed time for its fulfilment. The "end'' in Habakkuk was the goal of the vision. In Daniel it is the ‫ ע ח ק ץ‬a distinct chronological period. The end-time here embraces the sequence of events described in Daniel's vision, and so is a period rather than the endpoint of that period. In 8:19 the time of the vision's fulfillment, "the appointed time of the end," is also called "the latter time of the wrath" (‫ ) א ח ר י ת הזעם‬. Similarly in the Qumran scrolls we find references to the1)‫ ק ץ ה א ח ר ו ן‬Q p H a b 7:7, 12; compare the last generation in C D 1:12; 1QpHab 7:2) and to ‫קץ ח ר ו ן‬, the age of 7 For the angelic interpretation of the holy ones see my The Apocalyptic Vision of the Book of Daniel (HSM 16; Missoula: Scholars, 1977) 123-47, and my commentary on Daniel m the Hermeneia series (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993) 313-7. 8 See however J . Gerald Janzen, "Habakkuk 2:2-4," HTR 73 (1980) 53-78, who reads 'ēd witness, for 'öd, and understands the root ‫ פוח‬as testify: "For the vision is a witness to a rendezvous, a testifier to the end—it does not lie."

wrath (CD 1:5; 1QH 3:28). In all of these cases the ‫ קץ‬refers to the period of tribulation before the definitive divine intervention. Daniel 8 also addresses the duration of this period. One holy one asks another in 8:13: "for how long is the vision?" and specifies it with reference to "the daily offering, the desolating transgression and the sanctuary and the host given over to be trampled." 9 The answer is given in terms of the daily offering: "for two thousand three hundred evenings and mornings until the sanctuary is set right." The actual interpretation of the vision ends with the breaking of the little horn (i.e., the death of Antiochus Epiphanes) and describes neither the rededication of the temple nor anything that comes after it. The number of days given, 1,150, is problematic, since it is less than the three and a half years of Daniel 7, but greater than the three years for which the temple was actually desecrated (1 Macc 4:52-54). It is undoubtedly a real prediction, made before the rededication of the temple. The divergence from the three and a half years may be explained by the fact that it refers to a different, and shorter period than chap. 7. The earlier reference was to the duration of the persecution; the calculation in chap. 8 begins from the desecration of the temple some months later.10 In chap. 8, then, the end of the period of wrath coincides with the end of the desecration of the temple. The ensuing state is not described. The most elaborate account of Daniel's eschatological chronology is found in chap. 9 in the prophecy of the seventy weeks of years. The three and a half years of Daniel 7 (and again of chap. 12) correspond to the last half-week of Daniel 9, when the desolator will suppress sacrifice a n d offering and the desolating a b o m i n a t i o n will b e in their place, until the p r e - d e t e r m i n e d destruction is p o u r e d out (9:27).

Here again the dominant concern is with the profanation of the temple. Little is said about what is to follow this last half-week, except for the introductory statement in 9:24: Seventy weeks are d e t e r m i n e d for your people a n d for your holy city, to finish the transgression, to bring sins to completion a n d to cancel iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal vision a n d p r o p h e t a n d to anoint a most holy place. 9

On the textual problems of this passage see James A. Montgomery, Daniel (ICC 19; New York: Scribners, 1927) 340-45.' I‫״‬ Hans Burgmann ("Die vier Endzeittennine im Danielbuch," ζΑΙΥ 86 [1974] 544) suggests that this figure was a compromise between the three and a half years of Daniel 7 and the three years that the temple was dcsccratcd according to 1 Maccabees. It is not apparent why such a compromise should bc found in Daniel, especially since other, contradictory figures arc also given.

The clearest point in this list is the last: the rededication of the temple. We cannot conclude from this that Daniel's only aspiration was the restoration of the cult. "To bring in everlasting righteousness" suggests a more far-reaching transformation. There is no doubt, however, that the desecrated temple dominates both chaps. 8 and 9 and that its restoration was the primary focus of the author's hopes in these chapters. The end and resurrection In chap. 11, in the review of Hellenistic history in the guise of prophecy, we are twice reminded that "there is still an end at the appointed time" (11:27, compare 35, again alluding to Habakkuk). T h e "time of the end" is defined somewhat differendy here from chap. 8. In 11:35, the persecution of the "wise" is not yet in the "time of the end." In 11:40 that phrase introduces the real prediction of the last compaign and death of the Syrian king. This is followed in 12:1 by the account of the resurrection of the dead "at that time." T h e focal point of the end in this section is no longer the rededication of the temple, but the judgment of the dead. The observation that the rededication of the temple is not the final "end" envisaged in the Book of Daniel is corroborated in the Epilogue in 12:5-13. In a manner reminiscent of chap. 8 an angelic figure asks "how long until the end of the wonders?" The root ‫ פ ל א‬, wonder, is used in different forms for the actions of Antiochus Epiphanes in 8:24 and 11:26. The wonders certainly include the desecration of the temple, but the reference here is broader than in chap. 8. T h e angel's answer repeats the "time, times and a half' of chap. 7. T h e duration is further specified in 12:11: F r o m the time w h e n the continual offering is taken away a n d the desolating a b o m i n a t i o n is set u p is o n e t h o u s a n d two h u n d r e d a n d ninety days.

This figure is a possible calculation of three and a half years," but it is obviously higher than the 1,150 days of chap. 8, although both calculations start from the disruption of the temple cult. Dan 12: 12 adds a further 45 days, to reach 1,335.12 11 Karl Marti [Das Buch Dankt [ΗΚΑΤ 18; Tübingen: Mohr, 1901] 92) breaks it down as 42 months of 30 days each, plus an intercalated month of 30 days. Burgmann ("Die vier Endzeittermine," 547) offers a more complicated calculation based on a 364 day year and also involving intercalary days. 12 Thomas Fischer, Seleukxden und Makkabäa (Bochum: Brockmeyer, 1980) 143-44 attempts to treat the figures in Dan 12:11-12 as prophecies after the fact. The 1,290

By far the simplest explanation of this variation is that the date was recalculated when the first number of days had passed, and then again when the second number elapsed. 13 It is a well-known fact that groups who make exact predictions do not just give up when the prediction fails to be fulfilled. Instead they find ways to explain the delay.14 One such way was to make a revised (presumably more precise) calculation. The re-calculation, however, had to be elicited by something, most probably by the passing of the date originally predicted. It is interesting to note that Dan 12:12 uses the verb ‫ ח כ ה‬, wait, which is also used in Hab 2:3, a passage to which Daniel has frequently alluded: "if it tarries wait for it, for it will surely come and it will not be late." The Pesher on Habakkuk from Qumran applies this passage to the "men of truth...when the last end-time is drawn out for them" (1QpHab 7:12). A similar situation is envisaged in Daniel. The "end" which was envisaged after 1,150 days, and then again after 1,290 days, is drawn out, and the faithful must "wait" for the later date. If this interpretation is correct, however, both figures in chap. 12 were added after the actual rededication of the temple, which took place exacdy three years after its desecration. For the author of this section of Daniel, the "end" is not constituted by the restoration of the temple cult. Rather it is marked by the resurrection. It is the "end of days" (]‫ )קץ הימי‬when Daniel too will rise to his destiny (12:13). Obviously, the final date predicted by Daniel also came and went. Daniel's prophecy was not discredited. Indeed Josephus, more than two centuries later, claimed that Daniel was distinguished from the other prophets because he not only prophesied future things but also fixed the time at which they would come to pass {Ant. 10.11.7 § 267). The exact figures took on symbolic significance, just as Jeremiah's prophecy of 70 years had been re-interpreted in Daniel. For Josedays would then refer to Judas' capture of the temple, 1,335 to the re-dedication. By counting back from the date of the re-dedication in December, 164, he arrives at a starting point in mid-167, and suggests that the daily offering was disrupted some six months before the installation of the desolating abomination. Dan 12:11, however, clearly takes both the disruption of the cult and the installation of the abom!nation together as the starting-point, and so Fischer's proposal is unsatisfactory. 13 This explanation was proposed by Hermann Gunkel, Schöpfimg und Chaos in Urzeit und Endzeit (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1895) 269, and has been widely accepted. 14 See the classic study by Leon Festinger et al., When Prophecy Fails: A Social and Psychological Study of a Modem Group that Predicted the Destruction of the World (New York: Harper & Row, 1956). Festinger's theory is applied to O T prophetic texts, but not to Daniel, by Robert P. Carroll, When Prophecy Failed. Cognitive Dissonance in the Prophetic Traditions of the Old Testatnent (New York: Seabury, 1979).

phus, Daniel's prophecy extended to the destruction ofJerusalem by the Romans. For Hippolytus and Jerome it referred to the time of the Antichrist and the end of the world. These, of course, were later adaptations of Daniel's prophecy, but it is clear from 12:5-13 that the Hebrew writer already looked beyond the restoration of the temple for an "end" that involved the transcendence of death. Interpreting the variety There is, then, some variety in the meaning of "the end" within Daniel 7-12. One way to explain this is to suppose that these chapters were composed over a few years and that the thought of the author or authors was modified in the process. We have already seen some reason to think that chap. 7 is slightly older than 8-12, if only by a few months, since it is in Aramaic and does not reflect the desecration of the temple. The end it envisages is the end of the persecution, to be followed by a kingdom of the people of the holy ones. Chaps. 8 and 9 appear to have been written shordy after that event and are dominated by the shock it engendered. Accordingly, in these chapters, the primary focus of "the end" is the restoration of the temple cult. Chaps. 10-12, however, give a more comprehensive account of the period of wrath, and focus their hopes not on the restoration of the temple but on the resurrection of the dead. The epilogue in Dan 12:5-13 was apparently written after the rededication of the temple, but still awaits the coming of "the end of the wonders." It may be, then, that "the end" took on new meanings in the light of new circumstances, and that the focus on the resurrection of the dead only emerged in the composition of the final major section, chaps. 10-12. While this conclusion is plausible, however, it is less than certain. Chaps. 7-9 are all very elliptical in what they say about the salvation that is to come, and it would be rash to conclude that each gives a complete account of the author's beliefs at a given time. As the book stands, in any case, the visions in chaps. 7-12 must be read as complementary, and not as independent compositions. The juxtaposition of complementary accounts is a typical feature of dream reports from antiquity (cf. the dreams of Gilgamesh and of Joseph) and is very typical of apocalyptic literature (compare the Similitudes of Enoch, 4 Ezra, 2 Baruch, Revelation). 15 From the viewpoint of the final editor, the removal of the desolating abomination 15

Adela Yarbro Collins, The Combat Myth in the Book of Revelation (HDR 9; Missoula: Scholars, 1976) 33-44.

and the restoration of the temple cult are preconditions of the end, but do not in themselves constitute the state of salvation. That state is described somewhat vaguely as a kingdom in chap. 7. Its most distinctive feature is specified in chap. 12 in the resurrection of the dead and the exaltation of the maskîlîm to the stars. Whether or not this latter belief was held by the author when chap. 7 was composed, the association of the righteous with the stars or angels is highly congruent with the close association of the faithful Jews with the holy ones of the Most High in the earlier chapter. 16 As the vast majority of commentators have recognized, the eschatology of these visions difTers from that of the earlier Prophets and the Psalms in several significant respects. They are pervaded by a sense of determinism, since the whole course of post-exilic history is purportedly foretold in the time of the exile, and all is written in the "book of truth" (Dan 10:21). The idea of an end at an appointed time is part of that scenario. In this respect Daniel is much closer to the Enochic Apocalypse of Weeks and Animal Apocalypse than to anything in the Hebrew Bible. The most significant difference over against the Hebrew Scriptures, however, lies in the hope of resurrection. 17 This is not a minor modification of prophetic eschatology but entails a profound shift in world-view.18 For the prophets, the goal of salvation was long life in the land and to see one's children's children. 19 For the maskîlîm of Daniel, as for the righteous of 1 Enoch 104, it is to become companions to the host of heaven. There is, of course, continuity with prophetic eschatology too. Daniel still thinks collectively of the people, and the judgment of the dead is not individualized as it is in later apocalypses. Daniel still entertains the hope for a kingdom on earth, in which the restored temple will surely have its place. The resurrection, however, adds a new ingredient to biblical eschatology, which would lend itself to more otherworldly tendencies 16

For the equivalence of stars and angels in Dan 12:3, sec Collins, The Apocalyptic Virion, 136-37. Compare 1 Enoch 104:1-6. 17 Some scholars find a belief in individual resurrection already in Isa 26:19 (e.g., Robert Martin-Achard, From Death to Life: A Study of the Development of the Doctrine of the Resurrection in the Old Testament (Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd, 1960) 130-38; Gerhard F. Hasel, "Resurrection in the Theology of Old Testament Apocalyptic," ^ 4 H ^ 9 2 (1980) 267-84; Leonard J . Greenspoon, "The Origin of the Idea of R esurrection, in Baruch Halpern and Jon D. Levenson, eds., Traditions in Transformation (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1981) 247-321. That passage, however, can be read more naturally, like Ezekicl 37, as a metaphor for the restoration of the Jewish nation. 18 See my essay, "Apocalyptic Eschatology as the Transcendence of Death," CBQ 36 (1974) 2143; reprinted in Paul D. Hanson, ed., Visionaries and Their Apocalypses (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983) 61-84. 19 This is still the case even in Isa 65:17-25, which speaks of a new heaven and a new earth.

in some strands of Judaism and in Christianity. Despite the communal emphasis in Daniel 12, the hope of the maškîlîm is radically different from that of a prophet such as Jeremiah. The affinities of Daniel on this point are not with the canonical Hebrew Scriptures (despite occasional attempts to harmonize them) but with the pseudepigraphic apocalypses.

CHAPTER ELEVEN

" T H E KING HAS BECOME A J E W " The Perspective on the Gentile World in Bel and the Snake Bel and the Snake is an apocryphal story appended to the Book of Daniel in the Greek and other versions. It tells how Daniel contrives to destroy the temple of Bel and have its priests put to death, and then kills a live serpent worshipped by the Babylonians. These actions provoke the wrath of the Babylonians, who coerce the king to hand over Daniel, whom they then throw into the lions' den. Daniel, survives, nourished by the prophet Habakkuk, who is transported from Judea for the purpose. When the king finds him alive after seven days, he releases Daniel, extols his God and throws his enemies to the lions. The relationship of this story to the Hebrew-Aramaic Book of Daniel is disputed. 1 The most obvious point of contact concerns the episode of Daniel in the lions' den. This motif was probably older than either story in which it now occurs. Both stories portray the Gentile king in exceptionally positive light. They also have some minor motifs in common, such as the use of the king's ring as a seal and the execution not only of Daniel's enemies but of their entire families. These latter motifs, however, are not very distinctive. On the whole, the differences between the two stories are much more impressive than the similarities. It is unlikely that either story depends direcdy on the other. In any case, Bel and the Snake does not appear to be derived from Daniel 6.2 There are two Greek versions of the apocryphal book, the Old Greek and Theodotion. It is generally agreed that the O G is the older of these.3 One of the peculiarities of that version is that Daniel is identified as a priest, 1

James A. Montgomery, Daniel (ICC; Edinburgh: Clark, 1929) 270, suggested that Bel was an eadier, popular form of the story. L.F. Hartman and A.A. DiLella, The Book of Daniel (AB 23; Garden City: Doubleday, 1977) 21, regard it as obvious that the apocryphal story was influenced by Daniel 6. Carey A. Moore, Daniel, Esther and Jeremiah. The Additions (AB 44; Garden City: Doubleday, 1977) 147-9 holds that the two stories have only a kernel of tradition in common. 1 See Lawrence M. Wills, The Jew in the Court of the Foreign King (HDR 26; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990) 129-38. Wills attaches more significance than I do to the motifs of the king's seal and the slaughter of the priests' families, and holds that Daniel 6 borrowed motifs from Bel and the Snake. 3 J . Schiipphaus, "Der Verhältnis von LXX- und Theodotion-Text in den apokryphen Zusätzen zum Danielbuch," %AW83(1971) 49-63.

who was a companion of the (nameless) king of Babylon.4 The story does not presuppose the identity of Daniel as established in Daniel 1-6, and the failure to name the king of Babylon suggests that the story circulated independently. The Court Tale tradition Bel and the Snake bears some generic similarity to the Aramaic tales in Daniel 2-6, in so far as it describes the adventures of Daniel at the Gentile court. It retains some typical features of the Court-Tale genre: 5 the king is gullible and Daniel's opponents are villainous and murderous. However, Bel and the Snake also differs from the Aramaic stories in several significant respects: First, the courtly elements of the story are reduced. Daniel's enemies are not rival sages, but priests and the Babylonian populace. Since Daniel is also identified as a priest in the OG, the conflict here is between priests of rival religions rather than between courtiers. This suggests a different Sitz-im-Leben for this story from that of the tales in Daniel 1-6. The court setting is retained because of the traditional associations of Daniel, and because of the persistent interest in the king, but some aspects of the court context have lost their significance. Second, the story of Bel and the Snake places less reliance on legendary features, or on interventionist theology, than the Aramaic tales. Of course the episode of Daniel in the lions' den, and of the miraculous transportation of Habakkuk to feed him there, is highly legendary, but such features are notably absent in Daniel's encounters with Bel and the Snake. The exposé of Bel has the character of a detective story. Daniel traps the priests by sprinkling ashes on the floor of the temple. Again, he disposes of the snake by feeding it a strange concoction which causes it to burst. No divine intervention is necessary in these cases. The commonsense, rational approach of these stories is typical of Jewish polemic against idols, which often takes the form of reductio ad absurdum? 4 Theodotion's version of the opening verses can be understood as a reworking of the O G , designed to incorporate it into the Book of Daniel, sincc Cyrus is named in Dan 6:28 and 10:1. The redactor must have realized that Darius the Mede was problematic, and substituted the name of an actual Median king, Astyages. 5 The best account of the genre is that of Wills, The Jew in the Court of the Foreign King. 5 Wills, The Jeiv in the Court of the Foreign King, 132, who cites the story attributed by Josephus to Hccataeus of Abdera about the Jewish archer Mosollamus, who shot a bird which pagan soldiers were watching to see if their campaign would be auspicious (AgAp1.22 §201-4).

Third, the polemic against idols is much more central in this story than in any of the tales in Daniel 1-6. More importandy, the context of the polemic is different. In Daniel 1 -6, as in Esther, the Jewish exiles pursue their careers without malice towards the Gentiles or their religious practices. If Daniel lectures Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar on true worship, it is only because he has been called in to address their problems. Belshazzar, moreover, is guilty of abusing the Jewish temple vessels. Daniel is not crusading against idolatry. The confrontations in Daniel 3 and 6 concern the rights of the Jews to be faithful to their own religion. In Bel and the Snake, in contrast, Daniel takes the offensive, and sets out to destroy the pagan idols, without provocation. There is no parallel for such aggressive action by a Jew in the other court tales. Even the idol parodies, such as Isa 44:9-20 or the Letter of Jeremiah, do not narrate or call for the destruction of the idols. Finally, despite the polemic against the idols, the Gentile king is portrayed in very positive light. It is, of course, typical of these stories that the Gentile king comes to acknowledge the God of Israel in some way. Bel and the Snake, however, introduces a new idea in genre of Jewish Court Tales when it has the Babylonians say, after the death of the snake, that "the king has become a Jew." It is not apparent that this accusation is justified in the context of the story and it is not endorsed by the author, but it is striking that such a possibility is even considered. Each of these points suggests that the apocryphal story reflects a rather different Sitz-im-Leben from the Aramaic Daniel stories, and invite some reflections on the setting of this intriguing work in Second Temple Judaism. For much of the Second Temple period the Jewish people lived in harmony with Gentile overlords, both in the Diaspora and in the land of Israel. The Court Tale, which describes the adventures of Jews in the service of foreign kings, is one of the typical literary products of the period. The biblical prototype of the genre is found in the Joseph story; the main examples are found in the books of Esther and Daniel. The genre was not peculiar to Judaism. Stories of a foreigner at court seem to have flourished especially under the Persian empire and several can be found in Herodotus. Many of these stories show what Larry Wills has called the "ruled ethnic perspective," and were a means for subject peoples to express their aspirations and dignity in fictional form. 7

7

Wills, The Jew in the Court of the Foreign King, 55-74.

The Jewish stories of this type are characterized by two features: loyalty to the king, on the one hand, and a strong sense of Jewish identity on the other. Esther and Mordecai show their exemplary loyalty to the king by exposing a plot to assassinate him (Esth 2:1923). Daniel flatters Nebuchadnezzar as the head of gold (Dan 2: 38) and wishes that the king's dream be for those who hate him and its interpretation for his enemies (4:19). Conflict is usually ascribed to the envy or malice of other courtiers, rather than to the king himself. In the Book of Esther, the danger is stirred up by Haman. Both Daniel and his three companions are victims of plots by rival courtiers (chaps. 3, 6). In each case the Jews arouse envy or resentment not only by their success at court, but by the fact that they are different. In the words of Haman: T h e r e is a certain people scattered a n d separated a m o n g the peoples in all the provinces of your kingdom; their laws are different f r o m those of every o t h e r people a n d they d o not keep the king's laws, so that it is not a p p r o p r i a t e for the king to tolerate t h e m (3:8).

In fact, Jews only had problems with Gentile laws in matters of religion and worship. The accusations against the Jews in Daniel 3 are more specific: T h e r e are certain J e w s w h o m you have a p p o i n t e d over the affairs of the province of B a b y l o n . . . T h e s e pay n o heed to you, Ο King. T h e y d o not serve your gods a n d they d o not worship the golden statue that you have set u p (3:12).

Idolatry and conversion Rejection of idolatry was, of course, one of the trademarks of Judaism in the post-exilic period. 8 The famous idol parodies of Second Isaiah are in the context of the overthrow of Babylon and the restoration of Judah, and are understandably colored with nationalistic fervor. Rejection of idols, however, did not necessarily imply the rejection of Gentile sovereignty. The fragmentary Prayer of Nabonidus, found at Qumran, the king recounts how he was smitten with an evil disease for seven years by the decree of God. For those seven years he was praying to gods of silver, gold and other materials, until a Jewish diviner taught him to honor the true God. While the conclusion of the document is missing, it is evidently ‫ י‬H.D. Preuss, VerspottungfremderReligionen im Alten Testament (BWANT 12; Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1971). On the critique of idolatry in the Hellenistic period see M. Gilbert, Le critique des dieux dans le Livre de la Sagesse (Sg. 13-15) (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1973); J.J. Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem. Jewish Identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora (New York: Crossroad, 1983) 137-74.

implied that the king comes to the knowledge of the true God. 9 The notorious episode of Nabonidus' self-imposed exile in Teman, then, was construed in Jewish tradition as divine punishment. What is remarkable, however, is that it also becomes the occasion for a story of the king's conversion, for which, of course, there was no historical basis whatever. The Jewish adaptation of the Nabonidus tradition was taken further in the Book of Daniel. Here Nabonidus is replaced by the more familiar figure of Nebuchadnezzar. The king is driven away from human society for "seven times" to teach him a lesson: that the Most High has sovereignty over the kingdom of mortals and gives it to whom he will" (4:32). In the end, Nebuchadnezzar "blessed the Most High and praised and honored the one who lives forever" (4:34). In the following chapter Belshazzar is berated for failing to learn from the example of Nebuchadnezzar and reverting to the worship of gods of silver and gold (5:23). Belshazzar meets a sudden fate, but he is exceptional among the Gentile kings in Daniel 1-6. The king who succeeds to the kingdom, the fictional "Darius the Mede," is sympathetic to Daniel, even when he is coerced by his courtiers to throw him to the lions. When Daniel survives the ordeal Darius is quick to recognize the God of Daniel as the living God. One of the lessons of Daniel 1-6 is that even Gentile kings must worship the God of heaven, who is the God of Israel, if their sovereignty is to endure. Conversely, these stories do not envisage any imminent overthrow of Gentile dominion. Their hopes and fantasies center on the sympathies, if not the outright conversion, of the Gentile monarchs. These stories do not define in detail the kind, or degree, of conversion expected of the kings. At the end of Daniel 2, Nebuchadnezzar tells Daniel "Truly your God is God of gods and Lord of kings and a revealer of mysteries..." (vs. 47). Nonetheless, in the next chapter he proceeds to set up a golden statue, and demand that his officials worship before it. While there are often problems of continuity between the individual stories in a book like Daniel, it his clear that the king's acknowledgment of the God of gods in Chap. 2 does not necessarily entail the renunciation of idols. Nebuchadnezzar seems to make a fresh discovery of the true God in Chap. 3, and again in Chap. 4. The last of these, which is an adaptation of the Nabonidus tradition, is especially interesting. In the Prayer of Nabonidus, the king confesses that he used to pray to idols, and this

9

See R. Meyer, Das Gebet des Nabonid (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1962).

would seem to imply that he had now renounced the practice, but it does not necessarily mean that he had become a monotheist. In Daniel 5, when Daniel berates Belshazzar for failing to learn from the example of Nebuchadnezzar, he points to the worship of idols, but not of the true God. This could be construed to mean that Nebuchadnezzar had renounced the worship of idols, but it may only mean that he acknowledged the superiority of the God of heaven. Interestingly enough, in the story of Nebuchadnezzar's madness in Daniel 4, the king is not told to renounce idolatry. Daniel simply counsels him to "atone for your sins with righteousness, and your iniquities with mercy to the oppressed" (vs. 27). Eventually, of course, the king acknowledges the sovereignty of the Most High, but he does not explicitly reject all other gods. Cyrus of Persia had acknowledged "the Lord, God of Heaven" as the one who had given him dominion (Ezra 1:2) without prejudice to his continuing polytheism. Josephus claims that even the mighty Alexander the Great acknowledged the God of Jerusalem. 10 Such acknowledgment is little more than a gesture of respect and does not imply conversion in any exclusive sense.11 The accusation of the Babylonians against the king in Bel and the Snake raises the possibility of a more serious conversion: "The king has become a Jew." In pre-exilic Israel, one only became a member of the people by intermarriage. 12 There were laws regulating the alien and the sojourner, but they were recognized as distinct categories. In the post-exilic period it became more common for people to attach themselves to the Jewish people for religious reasons (e.g. Isa 56:3,6), and gēr, alien, took on the meaning of proselyte.13 Not until the second century BCE however, do we hear of people becoming Jews. On three occasions the Maccabees compelled the Gentile inhabitants of recently conquered areas to adopt the Jewish way of life, including circumcision.14 Among them were the Idu10

Ant 11.8.5 §333. S.J.D. Cohen, "Alexander the Great and Jaddus the High Priest according to Josephus," AJSRev 7-8(1982-3) 41-68. There arc numerous examples of such praise of the God of Israel by Gentiles, dating back to Hiram of Tire in the time of Solomon (2 Chron 2:11). 11 On the spcctrum of different ways in which a Gentile might be attached to Judaism see S.J.D. Cohen, "Crossing the Boundary and Becoming a Jew," HTR 82(1989) 13-33. 12 J . Milgrom, "Religious Conversion and the Revolt Model for the Formation of Israel," JBL 101(1982) 169-76. 13 D. Kcllermann, "gûr," TOOT 2.439-49; K.G. Kuhn, "prosëlytos," TDNT 6(1968) 728-30. 14 Josephus, Ant 13.9.1 §257; 11.3 §319; 15.4 §397; S.J.D. Cohen, "Conversion to Judaism in Historical Perspective: From Biblical Israel to Postbiblical Judaism," Conservative Judaism 36(1983) 36.

means, from whom the house of Herod came. While some people regarded the later Idumeans as "half-Jews," they accepted and persevered in their Jewish identity. In the Book of Judith, which is probably of Hasmonean date, 15 when Achior the Ammonite "saw all that the god of Israel had done, he believed firmly in god, and was circumcised, and joined the house of Israel, remaining so to this day" (14:10). Here again the way to become a Jew was to be circumcised. The Epic of Theodotus, which says that the inhabitants of Shechem were required to adopt the Jewish way of life by being circumcized (pentemnomenous ioudaisai) should also be taken as a reflection of the policies of the Hasmoneans. 16 The expression "to become a Jew," however, is found, to my knowledge, in only one pre-Christian text besides Bel and the Snake. That occurrence, surprisingly, refers to Antiochus Epiphanes, who according to 2 Macc 9:17, resolved on his death-bed "to become a Jew and visit every inhabited place to proclaim the power of God." There are some noteworthy parallels between these two occurrences of the motif of becoming a Jew. Both involve Gentile kings, and both arguably reflect a Gentile perspective on what it means to become a Jew. Neither mentions circumcision, or any practice of Jewish law. Antiochus promises only to proclaim the power of God. The king in Bel and the Snake is said to have become a Jew because he has apparendy rejected idolatry. Neither would necessarily have been accepted by a Jewish community, 17 and they would certainly not have been accepted as Jewish by the Hasmoneans. Both stories, however show the emerging definition of Judaism in the Hellenistic world. Later, in the Roman period, such authors as Tacitus (Hist 5.5.2) and Juvenal (Sat 14.96-106) would regard circumcision as an essential mark of conversion to Judaism. 18 In the Hellenistic period, however, Jewishness was less stricdy defined, at least in some circles.

15 G.W.E. Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature Between the Bible and the Mishnah (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981) 109. J •J· Collins, "The Epic of Theodotus and the Hellenism of the Hasmoneans," HTR 73(1980) 93-104. The expression may be a paraphrase by Alexander Polyhistor rather than the phrase of Theodotus. 17 This point is validly emphasized by Cohen, "Crossing the Boundary," 27. It does not necessarily mean that circumcision was considered necessary for salvadon. See J.J. Collins, "A Symbol of Otherness: Circumcision and Salvadon in the First Century," in J . Neusner and E.S. Frerichs, eds., 70 See Ourselves as Others See Us: Christians, Jews, "Others" in Late Antiquity (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1985)163-85. 18 M. Stem, Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism (Jerusaalem: The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanides, 1980) 2.26,103. See also W. Gutbrod, "Israel," 77WT3(1965) 370.

It is interesting to compare these cases of "becoming a Jew" with the story of a king who actually did convert to Judaism, Izates of Adiabene, in the first century CE. The king's mother, Helena, who had already converted to Judaism, discouraged him from being circumcised, for fear that his subjects "would not tolerate the rule of a Jew over them." He was also assured by a Jew, Ananias, that he could worship God even without circumcision, but another Jew, named Eleazar, gave a stricter interpretation of the law and the king was circumcized. 19 This story, however, implies that Izates was not really a Jew, and would not be considered a Jew by his subjects, until he underwent circumcision. The difference between Izates and Cyrus in Bel and the Snake reflects different historical settings—the story of Izates is considerably later. While Bel and the Snake is a fiction, and not an historical report, it presupposes that the king's subjects would consider him to have become a Jew if he rejected idolatry, even if he had not been circumcised. There is, however, also a notable difference between the king in Bel and the Snake and Antiochus Epiphanes in 2 Maccabees 9. Antiochus makes his promise under duress, having been brought to his knees by the disease with which he is smitten by God. 20 Cyrus is persuaded of the futility of idols by Daniel's demonstration. For Antiochus, "becoming a Jew" is an act of repentance, and a dramatic reversal of his earlier attitude. Cyrus had been a sympathetic figure from the start. Moreover, Antiochus' death-bed resolution can hardly inspire much confidence in the context of 2 Maccabees and it is not in fact carried out. Cyrus is judged by others to have become a Jew, and while his conversion was not complete by Hasmonean standards, the narrative credits him with a significant move in permitting the destruction of the idols. The Destruction of the Idols Bel and the Snake is exceptional among Jewish court tales by Daniel's aggressive attitude towards the pagan idols. Even stories like the Prayer of Nabonidus and Daniel 4-5, which are clearly critical of idolatry, do not describe or demand the destruction of the idols. The destruction of idols was commanded by the Book of Deuteronomy, 19

Ant 20.2.4 § 38-48. See L.H. SchiflVnan, "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, 1987) 293-312. 20 Doron Mendels, "A Note on the Tradition of Antiochus IV's Death," IEJ 31(1981) 53-6 has argued plausibly that 2 Maccabees account of Antiochus' death is modelled on the Nabonidus tradition, which also underlies Daniel 4.

but the command concerned "the nations whom you are about to dispossess" and so the land of Israel. The zealous action of Elijah, and the reform of Josiah, were also directed against idolatry in the land of Israel. For an attack on idols outside of Israel we must wait for the Book of Jubilees, an apocalypse composed in Israel in the second century BCE21 In Jubilees 12:2 Abraham upbraids his father: "What help or advantage do we have from these idols before which you worship and bow down?" His father advises him to "be silent, my son, lest they kill you." Abraham, however, "arose in the night and burned the house of idols. And he burned everything in the house. And there was no man who knew" (12:12-13).22 T h e spirit of the Book ofJubilees is very different from that of the Court Tales of Esther or Daniel. It exhibits hostility not only to idolatry, but to the Gentiles. Abraham exhorts Jacob to "Separate yourself from the gentiles and do not eat with them, and do not perform deeds like theirs" (22:16). Intermarriage with foreigners is condemned at length (30:7-17). Levi and his sons are blessed "because he was zealous to do righteousness and judgment and vengeance against all who rose up against Israel" (30:18). This militant nationalism reflects the setting in which Jubilees was written, either the time of the Maccabean revolt or the subsequent campaigns of the Hasmoneans. In Bel and the Snake, however, we find no such hostility to the Gentiles. Daniel is the loyal servant, and honored friend of the king. His efforts are directed towards enlightening the king, and delivering him from the deceptions of the Babylonian priests. There is no objection to Gentile sovereignty as such. Bel and the Snake, then combines some features which are otherwise associated with diverse settings in Judaism. On the one hand the acceptance of Gentile sovereignty is typical of Diaspora literature in the post-exilic period; on the other hand the aggressive attitude towards idols is otherwise associated with nationalistic or exclusivistic strands in the Hellenistic period. In fact, there is no consensus as to the provenance of this document.

21 For different positions on the date of Jubilees see J . VanderKam, Textual and Historical Studies in the Book of Jubilees (Missoula: Scholars Press, 1977) 207-88, who favors the early Maccabean era and D. Mendels, The Land of Israel as a Political Concept in Hasmonean Literature (Tübingen: Mohr, 1987) 57-88. See also the cautionary observations of R. Doran, "The Non-Dating ofJubilees," JSJ 20(1989) 1-11. 22 The legend of Abraham's destruction of the idols subsequendy became widespread. See e.g. Apoc Abraham 1-8. Compare the analogous action by J o b in T. J o b 2-5.

The Provenance of Bel and the Snake It is generally agreed that the Old Greek translation of Daniel was completed no later than 100 BCE.23 If we may assume that Bel and the Snake was incorporated into the Book of Daniel by the O G translator, 24 then the date can be no later than the second century BCE.25 Moreover, the simple paratactic style and occasional Hebraisms (e.g. kai egeneto) suggest that the story was composed in a Semitic language, probably Hebrew rather than Aramaic in view of the apparent use of the waw consecutive. 26 Since the translation was included in the Old Greek of Daniel, the original date of composition can hardly be later than 150 BCE. The fact that the O G version makes Daniel a priest, in contradiction to Daniel 1, also suggests a date before M T Daniel had become authoritative, therefore before the mid-second century. On the other hand, the idea that a Gentile could "become a Jew" is not attested before the second century. There are then, reasonably strong indicators of date, which point to the first half of the second century BCE. The place of origin is more elusive. T h e ostensible setting is Babylon, but the story shows no familiarity with Babylonian life and religion. T h e story of the statue of Bel is a crude parody, and there was no prominent cult of a live serpent in Babylon. Yehoshua Grintz has argued that the story was composed in Babylon "when Bel was no longer worshipped," so between the destruction of the temple of Bel by the Persian king Xerxes and its restoration by Alexander the Great. 27 This theory does not account for the episode of the Snake, which suggests that the author had only the most superficial familiarity with Babylonian religion. Wolfgang Roth, in contrast, gave primary consideration to the polemic against idolatry, and assigned the book to Egyptian Judaism in the first century BCE. 2 8 This date is too late, however. Moreover, if the original language was Hebrew or Aramaic, then an origin in the Egyptian Diaspora, 2 ‫ י‬Sharon Pace Jeansonnc, The Old Greek Translation of Daniel 7-12 (CBQMS 19; Washington: CBA. 1988) 19, argues that "the translation of the Semitic text of Daniel into Greek is possible and plausible at a point shortly after its written composition." 24 Moore, The Additions, 128. 25 Contra W.M.W. Roth, "For Life, He Appeals to Death (Wis 13:18). A Study of Old Testament Idol Parodies," f.BQ, 37(1975) 43, who suggests a date in the first century BCE. 26 See Moore, The Additions, 119-20. Moore suggests that the original composition was in Aramaic but that Theodotion was based on a Hebrew translation. This solution seems unduly complicated. 27 Yehoshua M. Grintz, "Bel and the Dragon." Encjud 4(1971) 412. 28 Roth, "For Life, He Appeals to Death," 21-47.

in the Hellenistic period, is very unlikely, since there is no clear example of Egyptian-Jewish literature from this period in a Semitic language. If the original language was Hebrew rather than Aramaic, the land of Israel is by far the most likely place of composition. 29 Composition in Aramaic is also quite compatible with composition in the Jewish homeland in this period. Witton Davies argued that the story reflects bitter persecution, and so associated it with the time of Antiochus Epiphanes. 30 In fact, however, it is Daniel, not the Babylonians who initiates hostilities in this story, and the Gentile king is sympathetic to the Jew throughout. Such a portrayal of a Gentile king is more plausibly dated before the time of Antiochus Epiphanes rather than later. We may suggest then that the original document was composed in Judea in the first quarter of the second century BCE, in circles different from those that collected the tales of Daniel 1-6. Since this is the only source in which Daniel is identified as a priest, we might suppose that the author too belonged to priestly circles. If this reconstruction is right, then the story of Bel and the Snake can illuminate another facet of a poorly documented period of Jewish history. T h e only document that is firmly dated to the first quarter of the second century is the Wisdom of Ben Sira. That book, too, has a deferential attitude towards rulers,31 and is glowing in its praise of Simon the Just, "in whose time the house of God was renovated" by the beneficence of the Seleucid king, Antiochus III.32 Sirach also knows the uselessness of offerings to idols that can neither eat nor smell.33 The wisdom teacher, however, lacks Daniel's zeal for the destruction of idols and pays little attention to specifically Gentile kings.34 Bel and the Snake represents a more purist, less tolerant, strain, emerging in Judaism in this period. What is of interest in this document, however, is that religious intolerance did not necessarily entail political rebellion. It expresses the hope for the triumph of monotheism even within the domain of Gentile sovereignty. The hope was that destruction of idols might be accomplished if the king, even in a loose sense, were to become a Jew. 29

So also T. Witton Davies, "Bel and the Dragon," A P O T 1.656. Davies, ibid. 31 E.g. Sir 10:5: "Sovereignty over everyone is in the hand of God, who imparts his majesty to the ruler." 32 Sir 50:1, compare Ant 12.3.3 §129-44. 33 Sir 30:19. 34 The glaring excepdon is found in the prayer in Sir 36:12: "Smash the heads of the hostile rulers..." The authenticity of this prayer is disputed. See T. Middendorp, Die Stellung Jesu ben Siros zwischen Judentum und Hellenismus (Leiden: Brill, 1973) 113, 125. 30

PART T H R E E SIBYLS

CHAPTER TWELVE

T H E JEWISH TRANSFORMATION OF SIBYLLINE ORACLES

In a lengthy review essay of H.W. Parke's posthumous book on Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy in Classical Antiquity, David Potter praised the work for having "finally succeeded in rescuing sibyls from the fringes of Judeo-Christian pseudepigrapha where they have been relegated by many scholars, and in placing the development of the sibylline tradition firmly in the classical world." 1 I am not aware that Parke himself had any such salvific intentions. His book is as irenic as it is learned. But Potter's claim raises some fundamental questions about "the sibylline tradition," if we may speak of such a thing as a unified entity. 2 If the sibyl occupied an important place in the prophetic imagination of Christians, and even of Moslems, through the Middle Ages, what sibyl was this? The oracles read and revised in the time of the Crusades had not been written on leaves in the cave at Cumae, nor were they uttered by a shrivelled old woman who had lived for centuries but forgotten to ask for the gift of youth. They were, for the greater part, written by anonymous Jews and Christians, beginning in the Hellenistic and Roman periods. Michelangelo did not paint sibyls on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel because they knew the ritual response to the birth of an androgyne, but because they were believed to have prophesied Christ. While Parke's book reminds us that sibyls and sibylline prophecy had a long and illustrious history in pagan antiquity, their influence on the Christian West was due primarily to the way the tradition was developed in the Jewish and Christian pseudepigrapha. It is true, of course, that both Jews and Christians propagated oracles in the name of the sibyl because of her reputation in the pagan world. But in the process they changed the kind of oracles attributed to the sibyl, and thereby extended her reputation long after the gods of antiquity had faded away 1 D.S. Potter, "Sibyls in the Greek and Roman World," Journal of Roman Archaeology 3(1990) 471-83 (the quotation is from p.471); H.W. Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy in Classical Antiquity (London and New York, 1988; paperback edition, 1992). 2 In his book, Prophecy and Histoiy in the Crisis of the Roman Empire. A Historical Commentary on the thirteenth Sibylline Oracle (Oxford, 1990) 102, Potter opines that "it is probably incorrect to speak of a 'Sibylline tradition' in antiquity."

The pagan sibylline oracles Unfortunately, we have only scattered examples of sibylline verses from pagan sources. 3 They are usually written in epic hexameters, but this was generally true of Greek oracles and not peculiar to the sibyl.4 Consequently, an oracle attributed to the sibyl in one case might be assigned to the Pythian oracle on another. 5 Some were evidently predictions of warfare. Plutarch reports an oracle related to the battle of Chaeronea in the fourth century: As for the battle on Thermodon, may I be far away from it as an eagle in the clouds and the upper air, to behold it only. T h e vanquished weeps, but the victor is destroyed. 6

Another example from Pausanias refers more openly to the Second Macedonian War: You Macedonians who boast in the dynasty of the Argeadae, Philip when he rules shall be to you a blessing and a bane. Indeed the earlier shall place monarchs over towns and peoples, but the younger shall lose all honour, when he has been subdued by men both from west and east. 7

Other sibylline oracles deal with natural disasters. Pausanias speaks of an earthquake which shook the island of Rhodes so severely that it appeared that the oracle of the sibyl with reference to Rhodes had been fulfilled.8 Strabo cites an oracle about the Pyramus river silting up its beach and reaching to Cyprus. 9 An oracle to this effect is also found in Sib O r 4:99-101. Consultations of the sibylline books at Rome are recorded on about 50 occasions, dating between 496 and 100 BCE.10 These accounts typically tell of some plague, famine or prodigy which 3

Most of the extant examples are collected in C.H. Alexandre, Excursus ad Sibyllina (Paris, 1856) 118-47; 242-53. See also G. Crönert, "Oraculorum Sibyllinorum Fragmentum Osloense," Symbolae Osloenses 6(1928) 57-59. In addition to the study of Parke see now Innocenzo Cervelli, "Question! Sibilline," Studi Storni 4(1993) 895-1001 (pp.895-934 provide a review of the pagan sibyls). 4 Potter, "Sibyls in the Greek and Roman world," 474, citcs a sibylline oracle in iambic trimeters. 5 E.g. the famous line "do not disturb Camarina, for it is better undisturbed," which probably originated as a Delphic response, is found in Sib Or 3.736. 6 Plutarch, Dem 19; 21.4. Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy, 119. 7 Pausanias, 7.8.9; Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy, 132. 8 Pausanias 2.7.1. 9 Strabo 1.3.8; 12.2.4. 10 H. Cancik, "Libri Fatales. Römischc Offcnbarungsliteratur und Geschichtstheologie," in D. Hellholm, ed., Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East (Tübingen, 1983) 549-76; Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy, 190-215.

provided the impulse for consultation, and some details of a ritual prescribed by the sibylline books. The actual oracles are not cited. It would seem, however, that the Roman sibylline books were quite different in character from the preserved sibylline oracles, which typically predict disasters rather than prescribe solutions. Only one direct quotation from the Libri Sibyllini has been preserved, in the Memorabilia of Phlegon." This is an oracle, or a combination of two oracles, of seventy hexameters in all. It reports the birth of an androgyne, and prescribes a long list of rituals and offerings to the gods. T h e nature of the Roman collection probably changed in the first century BCE, when the old collection was destroyed by fire, and oracles were collected from Erythrae and other sources.12 The use of acrostics was used as a guideline in judging the authenticity of the oracles collected. It is not apparent, however, that acrostics were always a feature of sibylline style. In the standard collection, there is only one example of an acrostic, a Christian poem in Sib O r 8:21750. While sibylline oracles were invoked for political purposes on more than one occasion in the late Republic, they were also used in the traditional way in response to prodigies. Tibullus gives the enduring impression of the Roman associations of sibylline oracles around the turn of the era: [The Sibyls] told that a comet would be the evil sign of war, and how plenty of stones would rain down on the earth. They say that trumpets have been heard and weapons clashing in the sky, and that groves have prophesied defeat... 1 3

Another extended oracle, of 37 hexameters, preserved by Phlegon, was apparendy used by Augustus in support of the celebration of the Ludi Saeculares in 17 BCE.14 Like the oracle on the birth of the androgyne, this oracle is in large part a prescription of rituals, but it concludes by promising lasting Roman dominion "over all the land of Italy and of the Latins" if its rituals were followed.15 These scattered examples may give some sense of the characteristics associated with sibylline oracles. With the exception of the Roman sibylline books, which appear to have prescribed rituals, the 11

FGH 257 F 37 (pp. 1188-91). Luisa Breglia Pulci Doria, Oracoli Sibillini tra Ritual! e Propaganda (Studi su Flegonte di Tralles) (Napoli: Liguori, 1983); H. Diels, Sibyllimsche Blatter (Berlin: Reiner, 1890). 12 Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy, 138-39. 13 Tibullus, 2.5.71-80. Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy, 210, suggests that Tibullus may have been influenced by Livy's accounts of the consultadons of sibylline oracles at an earlier period. 14 Diels, Sibyllinische Blätter, 14. 15 See Breglia Pulci Doria, Oracoli Sibillini, 210-68.

oracles seem to be predictions of wars, political events or natural disasters. While several such predictions might be strung together, the oracles do not appear to be developed literary units.16 A passage in Sib O r 3:401-88, which is usually attributed to the Erythrean sibyl and which predicts assorted natural and military disasters, may give a fair impression of the style. The oldest Jewish oracles Sibylline prophecy was originally a Greek phenomenon, which enjoyed considerable prestige in the Roman world but had been imported into Italy by Greek colonists.17 The Jews were, to the best of our knowledge, the only eastern people in antiquity who engaged in the production of sibylline oracles, and they did so repeatedly over several hundred years.18 We find reports of other sibyls outside the Greek and Roman world, but these reports should be viewed with considerable scepticism. Nicanor, who allegedly wrote the deeds of Alexander the Great, is said to have reported a Persian sibyl.19 At most, we may suppose that he encountered a Persian prophetess, whom he dubbed a sibyl, by way of assimilating her to Greek categories. The Libyan sibyl listed by Varro was, in Parke's words, "simply a literary fantasy," derived from Euripides. 20 In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, scholars conjured up a BabyIonian sibyl, as the supposed source of the passage about the tower of Babylon in Sib O r 3:97-109.21 The passage in question, however, is blatantly anti-Babylonian and depends on the Book of Genesis. At the end of Book 3 of the Sibylline Oracles, the sibyl says that she "left the long Babylonian walls of Assyria" (Sib Or 3:810). She goes on, however, to claim that she was daughter-in-law of Noah (3:827), and there can be little doubt that the real author was Jewish. 16

A. Momigliano, "From the Pagan to the Christian Sibyl," Nona Contribute (Rome, 1992) 13: "Pagan Sibylline oracles seldom went beyond individual events; they seldom pursued what wc might call the great currents of world history." " Sec Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy, 71-99 on the association of the sibyl with Cumae. ,8 J.J. Collins, "The Development of the Sibylline Tradition." ANRW 11.20.1 (1986) 421-59. 19 We have the report third hand, cited by Varro, who in turn was cited by Lactantius, Divinae Institutiones 1.6.8-12. 20 Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Oracles, 32. 21 J . GcfTcken, "Die Babylonische Sibylle," Nachrichten der königlichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen phil.-hist. Kl. (1900) 88-102; W. Bousset, "Die Beziehungen der ältesten jüdischen Sibylle zur Chaldäischcn," .ζ/VTV 3(1902) 23-50. A. Peretti, La Sibilla Babilonese nella Propaganda Ellenisttca (Firenze: La Nuova Italia, 1943). See the critique o f V . Nikiprowctzky, "La Sibylle juive et le 'Troisième Livre' des 'PscudoOracles Sibyllins‫ ׳‬depuis Charles Alexandre," ANRW 11.20.1 (1986) 477-521

Pausanias concludes his list of sibyls with reference to a prophetess who was brought up in Palestine named Sabbe, whose father was Berosus and her mother Erymanthe. Some say she was a Babylonian, while others call her an Egyptian Sibyl.22

This sibyl is further identified with the Persian in the Preface to the Sibylline Oracles. There is evidence, then, that the Jewish sibyl was sometimes mistaken for Babylonian, or Egyptian, or Persian, in the Greek world, a fact due in large part to the pseudonymity of the Jewish writings and the attempt to conceal their Jewish authorship. There is no good evidence, however, that any eastern people except the Jews actually produced sibylline verses. The oldest Jewish oracles are found in the first part of the standard collection of Sibylline Oracles (Books 1 -8).23 In the preface to these books, which can have been written no earlier than the sixth century CE,24 the editor claims to be the first "to set forth the oracles called Sibylline, which are found scattered and confusedly read and recognized, in one continuous and connected book." This collection (Books 1-8) was held to have a Christian character: for they expound very clearly about Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, the divine Trinity, source of life, and about the incarnate career of our Lord and God and Savior Jesus Christ.

The editor also acknowledges that "they clearly recount the things which are expounded in the Mosaic writings and the books of the prophets." In fact, Books 3-5 are generally recognized as Jewish

22

Pausanias 10.12.9. The sibyl may have been associated with Berosus because both had accounts of primeval history. On the name Sabbe, and the variant Sambethe, see E. Schuerer, A History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ, (rev. and ed. by G. Vermes, F. Millar and M. Goodman; 3 vols.; Edinburgh, 1973-1987) 3. 622-26. 23 The standard collection is derived from two manuscript collections, one of which included books 1-8, while the other repeated some of this material, mainly from books 4, 6 and 8, and also included books 11-14. See A. Rzach, Oracula Sibyllina (Leipzig, 1891); J . Geffcken, Die Oracula Sibyltina (Leipzig, 1902); English translation: J.J. Collins "Sibylline Oracles," in J.H. Charlesworth, ed. The Old Teslament Pseudepigrapha (2 vols.; New York, 1983, 1985) 1.317-472. Since the first two books of the second collection duplicate material from the first, there are no books 9 and 10 in the standard collection. 24 It depends on a work entided "Theosophy," which was a compilation of gentile testimonies in support of Christian teachings, and which was written in the time of the Emperor Zeno (474-91 CE). See Ε. Schuerer, A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ (revised and edited by G. Vermes, F. Millar and M. Goodman; 3 vols.; Edinburgh, 1973-87) 2.624, 628-9.

compositions, while Jewish strata can be recognized in Books 1-2 (which form one literary unit) and 8.25 Potter claims that "the sibyl was not selected by Christians as an important prophetess because of the background of the Jewish sibylline tradition," but because of the prestige of the sibyl in pagan circles.26 Yet only two of the shorter books in the collection can be regarded as original Christian compositions. Momigliano expressed the situation accurately and concisely: "The Jews had taught the Christians to forge Sibylline oracles, and their forgeries were in turn used and interfered with by Christians."27 There has been near unanimity among scholars that the earliest Jewish sibylline oracles are found in Book 3, date from the second century BCE, and were written in Egypt.28 Potter, however, has attempted to cast doubt on the antiquity of the Jewish oracles, and has even questioned whether these oracles were originally promulgated in the name of the sibyl.29 He grants that the third Sibylline Oracle, as it now stands, clearly contains a great deal ofJewish material, and some of it is obviously hellenistic in date. But this does not mean that the oracle in this 5th-6th c. AD collection is a hellenistic text as it is preserved. The tradition is so fluid that all that can be said about the texts...is that they had reached the form which they now assume at the time the collection was assembled.™

Such skepticism is scarcely warranted by the text. Most scholars agree that the oracles in vss. 1-96 were not originally part of the main body of the work.31 The third book proper begins at vs. 97. It is also agreed that the long collection of oracles against various places in the middle part of the book (vss. 295-544) contains oracles of diverse origin, some

25

See the introductions to the translations of the individual books in Collins, "Sibylline Oracles." 26 Potter, "Sibyls in the Greek and Roman World," 483. 27 A. Momigliano, "From the Pagan to the Christian Sibyl: Prophecy as History of Religion," Nono Contribute (Rome, 1992) 735. 28 See especially J. Geffckcn, Komposition und Entstehungszeit der Oracula Sibyllina (Leipzig, 1902). 2 ^ Potter faults the tradition of sibylline scholarship initiated by Gcifcken, and continued in my own work, for its "obsessive desire to isolate specific 'Christian,' 'Jewish,' and pagan elements in the poems and then to date them" (Prophecy and History, 96 n. 1). But his own sweeping statements about the futility of such efforts make no response to the arguments that have been advanced about specific passages. ' w Potter, "Sibyls in the Greek and Roman World," 478. 51 The exception is V. Nikiprowctzky, La Troisième Sibylle (Paris, 1970) 60-66, 217-25. In most manuscripts, Sibylline Oracles 3 bears the heading "from the second book, about God." Between verses 92 and 93, three manuscripts insert the note "seek here the remnants of the second book and the beginning of the third." The fragmentary oracle in vss. 93-96 is of uncertain provenance.

of which are derived from the Erythrean sibyl.32 Only one verse, 776, can be identified as a Christian interpolation. 33 If we bracket these passages, however, we still have some 475 sibylline verses (97-294 and 545-829) whose Jewish origin, in the Ptolemaic period, cannot reasonably be doubted. These oracles are punctuated by references to the seventh king of Egypt (193, 318, 608).34 Several passages presuppose the well-being of the Jerusalem temple. There are only a couple of allusions to Rome (161, 175-6) and no suggestion of conflict between Rome and the Jews or Christians. If the text were fluid down to the fifth or sixth century as Potter supposes, it is strange that Rome and Christianity have left so little trace, and that the interest in a king of Egypt from the line of the Greeks is so prominent. Potter has questioned whether "what we have in this oracle was originally attributed to a sibyl at all."35 The conclusion of Sib Or 3, which explicidy identifies the author as a sibyl, could, in principle, have been added at a late stage. But Alexander Polyhistor, who wrote in the first century BCE, attributes the account of the destruction of the tower of Babel to "the sibyl."36 Potter remains unconvinced: we cannot know if Alexander wrote this because he had read lines resembling Orac. Sib. 3.97-104 in a sibylline text, or if the author of these lines wrote them because he had read Alexander.

Alexander, in short, may have invented a sibylline reference, and someone then composed a sibylline book to incorporate it. I find this reasoning far-fetched. Alexander Polyhistor is, in fact, our main source for the fragments of Hellenistic-Jewish writers, which he

32

Verses 401-88 are widely believed to be pagan oracles taken from the Erythrean sibyl. This sibyl was said to have sung of the Trojan war and to have prophesied that Homer would write falsehoods (cf. Sib O r 3:414-32). Hence, perhaps, the association of Book 3 as a whole with the Erythrean sibyl. In Sib O r 3:814, the sibyl claims to be "born of Erythrae," and oracles found in this book are regulady attributed to the Erythrean Sibyl by Lactantius. Vss 350-80 date from the first century BCE. 33 For detailed argumentation see J J . Collins, The Sibylline Oracles of Egyptian Judaism (Missoula, Montana, 1974) 21-33. 34 For discussion of these passages and their implications for dating see Collins, The Sibylline Oracles, 28-32. Nikiprowetzky, La Troisième Sibylle, 208-17, argues for a first century date for the whole book, and takes the seventh king as Queen Cleopatra. 35 Potter, "Sibyls in the Greek and Roman World," 478. 36 See Schuerer, A History, 3. 646-7, Nikiprowetzky, La Troisième Sibylle, 17-19. The quotation from Alexander Polyhistor is preserved by Eusebuis, Chronicle (ed. Schoene) I col. 23.

quoted copiously.37 There can be no reasonable doubt that he was familiar with a Jewish sibyl, whose work included an account of the tower of Babel. If we are not to multiply entities without cause, we must conclude that the Jewish oracles from the second century BCE which are now attributed to a sibyl in Book 3 were composed originally under the sibylline pseudonym. We have several other instances where Jewish works were composed under Gentile pseudonyms in the Hellenistic age (e.g. the pseudo Orphic texts, pseudo-Phocylides) and where Jews imitated Greek literary forms (the tragedy of Ezekiel, the epics of Philo and Theodotus). The heyday of such compositions was the second century BCE. 3 8 Our question, then, is how far these earliest Jewish oracles conformed to pagan prototypes, and in what ways they adapted and redefined the genre. Continuity and innovation H.W. Parke has argued, reasonably enough, that if Hellenistic Jewish writers wanted to pass off their compositions as the work of a sibyl, they had to assume the literary conventions expected of a Sibyl. The matter to be conveyed was sometimes more appropriate to a Hebrew prophet, but the manner had to approximate generally to the style of a pagan prophetess. 3 "

The problem, however, is that the overall impression given by the Jewish and Christian books is very different from that conveyed by the extant pagan oracles. Sib Or 3:97-829, which is generally thought to contain the oldest material in the standard collection, is loosely structured. It begins with an account of the tower of Babel, followed by a euhemeristic account of the Titans. This account of early history is followed by a list of kingdoms and a further prophecy of world kingdoms, followed by a passage of miscellaneous woes. Then there is a long passage in praise of the Jews. The middle part of the book is taken up with oracles against various places, including the passage we have already " See the classic study of J. Freudenthal, Alexander Polyhistor und die von ihm erhaltenen Reste jüdischer und samaritanischer Geschichtswerke (2 vols.; Breslau, 1874-75) and the comments of J. Strugncll, "General Introduction, with a note on Alexander Polyhistor," in Charlesworth, The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, 2.777-8 (introducing the translations of the fragmentary Jewish writings). 38 Sec further Schuercr, 'Jewish Writings under Gentile Pseudonyms," in A History, 3. 617-94 (written by M. Goodman), and J.J. Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem. Jewish Identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora (New York, 1984). 35 Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy, 6.

ascribed to the Erythrean sibyl. The latter part of the book contains an exhortation to the Greeks to bring offerings to the temple of the great God, a eulogy of Jews, a prophecy of judgment on idolators, and repeated predictions of eschatological judgment interspersed with appeals for conversion. T h e book concludes with an explicit attribution to the sibyl. Some of the other Jewish sibylline books are more tightly structured. The core of the fourth book is taken up with a prophecy of four kingdoms (Assyria, Media, Persia, Greece), which span ten generations. This is followed by a prophecy of the rise of Rome, which is not counted in the ten generations, and seems to have been added to bring the oracle up to date in the Roman period. If we bracket out the passage on Rome, the four-kingdom oracle, which culminates in the rule of Macedonia, presumably dates from the Hellenistic period and is arguably older than anything in Book 3. Sib O r 1-2 was also structured by a schema of ten generations. Apart from the obvious use of prophetic hexameters, and the selfidentification of the sibyl at the end, the clearest indication of continuity with the pagan oracles in Sib Or 3 is found in the oracles against various places in vss. 295-544, including the verses that appear to have been borrowed from the Erythrean sibyl. The sibylline character of the oracles would seem to rest on such passages as this, and so I would argue that some part of this section, though obviously not all of it, was included in the work of the original Jewish sibyl. Less obvious, perhaps, is the general resemblance of Sib O r 3:545-72 and 624-34 to the oracles preserved by Phlegon insofar as the oracles do not merely predict disasters, but also prescribe a remedy, which relies heavily on ritual action: Greece, also, by offering the holocausts of oxen and loud-bellowing bulls, which she has sacrificed, at the Temple of the great God, will escape the din of war and panic and pestilence...(564-6) Sacrifice to God hundreds of bulls and firstborn lambs and goats at the recurring times..." (625-6).

The interest in ritual and sacrifice is especially characteristic of the Roman sibyllina, and it is not clear that the Jewish sibyllist would have known such oracles, but the resemblance is worth noting. The most obvious innovation of the Jewish sibyl lies in her emphasis on moral exhortation. Sibylline oracles had always been used for religious and political propaganda. The denunciations of idolatry in the Third Sibyl (e.g. vss. 545-49) can be viewed in that light; it is important that sacrifice be ofTered to the right God. But the sibyl also interjects exhortation of a more directly ethical nature:

avoid 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 (762-6).40

It is readily admitted that the Jewish sibyllist had no pagan precedent for his religious exhortation and moral censure. In this matter he stood in the tradition of the Hebrew prophets, not that of the pagan sibyl. But neither the oracles of destruction against various places nor the passages of moral exhortation determine the overall shape of the Jewish sibylline oracles. These elements are embedded in a broad historical framework, which reaches back to the building of the tower of Babel, is greatly concerned with the succession of world kingdoms, and looks forward to an eschatological judgment and ultimately to the transformation of the earth to an idyllic and Utopian state. It is this concern with universal history that gives the oracles of the standard collection their distinctive shape.41 The question arises whether this concept of universal history, ranging from primeval times to the imminent future, was associated with the sibyl in pagan antiquity, or whether it was the contribution of the Jewish pseudepigraphic writers. The sibyl and universal history Parke, assuming that the Jewish sibyl followed pagan prototypes closely, has claimed that the Sibyl does not usually start her prophecy from some point in contemporary historic time and continue straight into the future. She begins with some primevally early epoch and leads on in chronological sequence through succeeding ages. 42

But where do we find such an oracle attributed to the sibyl, except in cases that clearly betray Jewish authorship? The sibyl was presumed to be ancient, and she was alleged to have predicted the Trojan war. 43 But the claim that she predicted events at different periods in 40

Compare the praise of the Jews in vss. 218-64, which contains an implicit denunciation of the vices of the Gentiles. 41 See especially A. Momigliano, "From the Pagan to the Christian Sibyl," 735: "What emerges from this brief and superficial analysis of Book III of the Sibylline books is the complicated effort undertaken by the Jewish Sibylline forger...in order to transform the Sibylline oraclcs into a new, religious, interpretation of the whole of history." 42 Parke, 1bid., 7. 43 Heraclitus said that the sibyl "reaches a thousand years by her voice on account of the god," (Plutarch, De Pythiae Oraculis 397B), but the reference is presumably to her longevity, and does not imply that she prophesied the course that history would take over a thousand years.

history does not require that she ever strung these events together in chronological sequence. Contrary to Parke, the literary device of converting comment on the past and present into the form of prophecy spread over a vast period was not an invention of the Greeks. It is found in various forms throughout the Near East, not least in the Hebrew Bible.44 Ex eventu prophecies that bear some analogies to the sibylline prophecies can be found in Babylonian prophecies dating from the time of Nebuchadnezzar I (c. 1127-1105 BCE) to the Hellenistic period. 45 They became a trade-mark of the Jewish apocalyptic writings in the Hellenistic period. 46 The classical sources do not indicate that such extended prophecy after the fact was a significant factor in pagan sibylline oracles.47 Sib O r 3 followed the account of the tower of Babel with a euhemeristic account of Greek mythology. Parke asks whether the Jewish author, in imitating his model, was faced with a theogony as part of the pattern." 48 The sibyllist was indeed familiar with such Greek materials. T h e obvious source is Hesiod.49 By incorporating a Hesiod-like passage, the Jewish sibyllist strengthened his credentials as a witness from the Greek world, and disguised his Jewish identity. It is not necessary to infer that a theogony was a standard element in sibylline prophecy. Parke admits that the notion of a finiil judgment, or of the définitive intervention of a god on behalf of his people, was "a termination not normally accepted as a concept by the classical Greeks." 50 The Jewish notion of divine judgment could be combined readily enough with the predictions of disasters, beloved by the sibyl, but here again we find a significant adaptation of the traditional sibylline form in the Jewish work. The notion of a cosmic judgment was a standard feature of Jewish apocalyptic writings roughly contemporary with the Third Sibyl.

44

An early example can be found in Gen 15:18-21. A.K. Grayson, Babylonian Historical-Literaiy Texts (Toronto, 1975); W.G. Lambert, The Background ofJewish Apocalyptic (London, 1979). 46 J.J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination (New York, 1984) 6. 47 Mention should be made here of the Alexandra of Lycophron, which begins with the first sack of Troy by Heracles and concludes with an extensive oracle about the Romans. Whether Lycophron modelled his poem on (unknown) sibylline prototypes, or whether the Alexandra served as a model for later sibyllists, is much disputed, but in any case Cassandra is not a sibyl. See Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy, 16-17. 48 Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy, 11. 49 O n the use of Hesiod in Sib Or 1-2 see A. Kurfess, "Homer und Hesiod im 1 Buch der Oracula Sibyllina," Philologus 100(1956) 147-53. 50 Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy, 11. 45

The notion of universal history was by no means unknown to the Greeks. Arnaldo Momigliano has argued that it was primarily Greek historians who developed it.51 The point at issue here is whether universal history had become a theme of sibylline prophecy in pagan antiquity, before the genre was appropriated by the Jews. T o my knowledge, there is only one piece of positive evidence for such a theme in a pagan Sibylline oracle. This is the famous line in Virgil's fourth Eclogue: "ultima Cumaei venit iam carminis aetas." Virgil goes on to speak of a new world order, the end of the iron generation and the rise of a "gens aurea." The grammarian Servius, writing about 400 CE explained that the Cumean sibyl divided the saecula according to metals, said who would rule over each saeculum, that the Sun, identified with Apollo, would reign over the tenth and that everything would be renewed after the saecula had run their course. The Fourth Eclogue Scholarship on the Fourth Eclogue has been sharply divided between those who maximize the contribution of the sibyl and see Virgil as a purveyor of eastern mysticism,52 and those who minimize the role of the sibyl and place Virgil in the tradition of classical poetry. 53 Recendy Morton Smith described the Fourth Eclogue as "a delightful nonsense poem for a child's birthday," and derisively declared that "to suggest that he [Virgil] took it seriously would equate him in stupidity with his interpreters." 54 But even Smith granted that "some of the nonsense, it is true, may have come from the prophetic original." 55 Other minimalist critics, such as Günther Jachmann, have also accepted that that Virgil was referring to a 51

A. Momigliano, "The Origins of Universal History," in R.E. Friedman, ed., The Poet and the Historian. Essays in Literary and Historical Biblical Criticism (Chico, CA, 1983) 133-48. 52 The classic example of this trend is E. Norden, Die Geburt des Kindes (Leipzig, 1924). See also H. Jcanmaire, La Sibylle et le Retour de l'Age d'Or (Paris, 1939). 53 G. Jachmann, "Die Vierte Eklogc Vergils," Annali délia Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa 21(1953) 13-62; G. Williams, Tradition and Originality in Roman Poetry (Oxford, 1968) 274-84; W. Clausen, "Virgil's Mcssianic Eclogue," in J.L. Kugel, ed., Poetry and Prophecy. The Beginnings of a Literary Tradition (Ithaca, N.Y., 1990) 65-74; G. Radkc, "Vergils Cymacum Carmen," Gymnasium 66(1959) 217-46 argued that the "Cumean" was not the sibyl at all, but Hcsiod. This interpretation is found in some of the ancient scholia on Virgil, but has been decisively refuted by A. Wlosok, " , Cumacum Carmen' (Verg., Eel. 4,4): Sibyllenorakcl oder Hcsiodgcdicht?," in Forma Futuri. Studi in onore diMichele Pellegrino (Turin, 1975) 692-709. 54 M. Smith, "On the History of Apokalypto and Apokalypsis," in D. Heitholm, ed., Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East (Tübingen, 1983) 13. 55 Ibid.

known sibylline oracle, predicting the return of a golden age,56 and Arnaldo Momigliano, in one of his last publications, lent his authority to the view that "...Virgil provides some direct evidence for pagan Sibylline oracles which went beyond the prophecy of individual events..." 57 No contemporary scholar is prepared to speculate as boldly on the nature of this Cumean oracle as Norden did in his celebrated Geburt des Kindes, now universally rejected. The most venturesome contemporary scholar is David Flusser, who takes his lead from the commentary of Servius. Flusser argues that "Servius' Sibyl was surely pagan: the last, the tenth ruler is the Sun, the Sol Invictus or the Persian Mithras, who was understood as a sun-god." 58 He goes on to suggest that Servius was acquainted with the Persian sibyl, listed by Varro. But the existence of this Persian sibyl is poorly attested, and must be considered extremely dubious. Much of what Servius says can be inferred from Virgil , s poem. The idea that the sibyl divided the saecula by metals may be inferred from the promise of end of the iron generation and the coming of the golden. We cannot be certain, however, whether this motif was actually part of the sibylline prophecy or was introduced by Virgil in imitation of Hesiod. T o reconstruct a Persian sibyl, as Flusser does, on the basis of such inferences, is speculative indeed. The likelihood that Virgil was influenced by a pagan sibyl from the east seems rather remote, if only because the existence of such eastern sibyls is very dubious. Several scholars, however, have argued for another eastern influence on the poem, not from a pagan source but precisely from the Jewish sibylline oracles.59 If these were known to Alexander Polyhistor, they could equally well be known to Virgil. The visit of Herod to Rome in 40 BCE and the decree of the senate proclaiming him king of Judea occurred in the consulship of Asinius Pollio, who is addressed in the Fourth Eclogue. 60 An allusion to Jewish prophecy, then, might seem both plausible and timely.61 Most recendy, Parke has lent his support to this view:

56

Jachmann, "Die vierte Eldoge," 23 (following Th. Mommsen, Römische Chronologie, 184), 48. 57 Momigliano, "From the Pagan to the Christian Sibyl," 729 58 D. Flusser, "The four empires in the Fourth Sibyl and in the Book of Daniel," Israel Oriental Studies 2(1972) 163. 59 A. Kurfess, "Vergils vierte Ekloge und die Oracula Sibyllina," Historisches Jahrbuch der Gorres Gesellschaft 73(1956) 120-27. 60 Josephus, Ant 14. 377-89. 61 So Kurfess, "Vergils vierte Ekloge," 124.

Here it is significant that Vergil not merely presupposes the immediate advent of the Golden Age, but also endows it with some of the special features of the Jewish Sibyllines.62

A more extended argument along these lines was ofTered by R.G.M. Nisbet. 63 Two motifs in particular bring a Jewish source to mind: the birth of a child which marks the advent of the golden age, and the idyllic promise that flocks will not fear great lions and that the serpent shall die (lines 22, 24). T h e Jewish source in question is the Book of Isaiah, which speaks of the birth of a child in chapters 7 and 9, and of idyllic peace between the animals in Chap. 11. The correspondences are not so close as to suggest that Virgil knew the LXX, but Nisbett points a "close paraphrase of Isaiah" in Sib O r 3:788ff, a passage that begins "Rejoice, maiden..." Nisbett suggests that the kore here might ambiguously refer, or be taken to refer, to the virgin of Isaiah 7. Admittedly, there is nothing about the birth of a child in the extant sibylline oracles, but says Nisbett, the text was exceptionally fluid, and it is clear that the poet was using an oracle that is now lost. The miraculous child and the animal-peace are in both Isaiah and Virgil, but only the animal-peace in the Sibyl; it would avoid an awkward coincidence if we could suppose that Virgil's version of the Sibyl made some allusion to the child.

It seems to me, however, that the fluidity of the sibylline text has been exaggerated. In any case it provides no warrant for supplying sibylline oracles that are never actually attested. Moreover, I am not persuaded that the correspondences between Virgil and Isaiah, or between Virgil and Sib Or 3 are more than coincidence. Virgil's Virgo is not the mother of the child in the fourth Eclogue. The kore of the sibyl is the "virgin daughter of Zion." Neither can be identified with the virgin who bears a son in Isaiah chapter 7. The sibyl is obviously dependent on Isaiah for the transformation of the animal world. In Virgil, however, the lions and serpents are motifs in a passage that is indebted to the bucolic poetry of Theocritus. 65 As Nisbet acknowledges, the theme of "peace among the animals" fits western notions easily enough, even though it is not paralleled in 62

Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Oracles, 146. R.G.M. Nisbet, "Virgil's Fourth Eclogue: Easterners and Westerners," Bulletin of the Institute for Classical Studies 25(1978) 59-78. Compare also A. Kurfess, "Vergils vierte Eklogc und die Oracula Sibyllina," Historisches Jahrbuch der Gorres Gesellschaß 73(1956) 121-22. 64 Ibid., 66. Parke concedes that "it is too improbable that he had followed back the Oracula Sibyllina to their roots in the Scptuaginta," but he also posits a Jewish sibylline oracle that difTcred from what wc now have (Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy, 146). 65 Nisbet, "Virgil's Fourth Eclogue," 66. 63

western poetry before Virgil.66 Even if we suppose that this motif was borrowed from the Jewish sibyl, which is possible but by no means certain, this is only one motif in the poem. The Third Sibyl does not link the "peace among the animals" with the symbolism of the golden age, nor does it envisage a future where Achilles is sent again to Troy. The concept of an ultima aetas is more significant for our theme of universal history than the motif of peace among the animals. The question remains why Virgil associated the final age with a sibylline prophecy. Jachmann declared blundy that this question cannot be answered, and he may be right.67 We cannot even be sure that Virgil was citing a sibylline oracle that actually existed outside the Eclogue. He may have invented the allusion, just as he invented allusions to the sibyl in the Aeneid. 68 Even a fictitious allusion, however, requires some verisimilitude. It must have been plausible and credible that a sibyl would speak of a final age. Virgil and his audience must have associated the sibyl with this kind of prophecy, even if there was no specifically Cumean prophecy on the theme. It is possible, though far from certain, that Virgil derived the notion of a final age from Jewish sibylline prophecy. While Sib Or 3 does not divide history into ages, it envisages a wonderful, definitive future, along the lines of Isaiah chapter 11. The division into ages is typical of some other early Jewish sibylline oracles, most particularly Sib O r 4 and Sib O r 1-2. The oracle contained in the first and second books provides the best analogy, since it also associates the ages with metals. 69 As in the Fourth Eclogue, the golden age marks a new beginning, but unlike Virgil's poem, that new beginning comes, not at the end of history, but after the Flood. If Virgil indeed knew this oracle, or any Jewish prophecy, he adapted it freely. It does not, however, seem to me to be necessary to suppose that Virgil depended on a Jewish sibyl for the notion of the final age. The division of history into saecula had a native Italian background in 66

Ibid. Nisbet goes on to comment that "the coincidence becomes very considerable when one takes into account the prophetic nature of both passages and Virgil's acknowledged debt to the Sibyl." 6 ‫ י‬Jachmann, "Die vierte Ekloge," 37. 68 See Luciano Nicastri, "D Cumaeum Carmen di Virgilio (eel. IV 4)," in Marcello Gigante, ed., Civilta dei Campt Flegrei. Atti del Corwegno Internationale (Napoli, 1992) 41-78: "Ora è vero che Virgilio vuole che il lettore intenda un reale oracolo Sibillino 'cumeo', ma ciô non significa afFatto che quell'oracolo sia esistito fiiori dell'ecloga" (pp.70-71). 69 Kurfess, "Vergils vierte Ekloge," 125. See also Kurfess, "Oracula Sibyllina I/II," .ζ/Vjy40(1941) 151-65. Kurfess argues persuasively for a date around the turn of the era.

Etruscan tradition, which held that the Etruscan name would disappear after ten saecula, and there was some speculation in the first century BCE that the final saeculum was at hand. 70 Either the Cumean sibyl or Virgil himself may have picked up the theme from an Etruscan source. Virgil does not suggest that the sibyl's prophecy spanned the course of all ten generations in the manner of the Jewish oracles. Conversely, the Jewish sibyl need not have learned the division of history into ages from a pagan sibyl. The periodization of history was widespread in Jewish apocalyptic writings, and took several forms.71 It is too simple to say, with Momigliano, that a Jew conceived the idea of using the form of Sibylline oracles as a medium for communicating Jewish apocalyptic notions to the Greeks who did not know them. 72

Rather, the oracles were a medium for communicating the Jewish religion, in which apocalyptic notions had come to play a part by this time. David Flusser has made an impressive argument that both the sibyls and the apocalypses ultimately derived their ten-fold division of history from Persian traditions, such as we find in the Bahman Yasht. 73 The transmission of Persian traditions in the preChristian period, however, is a far more complex and problematic topic that the sibylline oracles, and we shall pursue it no further. It may suffice to say that there were many sources from which the Jewish sibyllists may have drawn the motif of ten generations besides Virgil's Cumean sibyl. While Virgil may have known a sibylline oracle that spoke of a final generation, it is not apparent that he knew a sibyl that prophesied universal history in the manner of the Jewish books.74 Even if he did know such oracles, the possibility that that they were Jewish 70 Cancik, "Libri Fatales," 557-58; Β. Gladigow, "Actas, aevum und saeclorum ordo. Zur Struktur zeitlicher Deutungssystemc, in D. Hcllholm, ed., Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East (Tübingen, 1983) 262-65. A haruspex Volcanius allegedly took the comets that appeared after Caesar's death as a sign of the end of the ninth saeculum and the beginning of the tenth. See also I.S. Ryberg, "Vergil's Golden Age," Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association 89(1958) 114-15. 71 See the comprehensive survey by A. Yarbro Collins, "Numerical Symbolism in Jewish and Early Christian Apocalyptic Literature," ANRW 2.21.2 (1984) 122287 (= Cosmology and Eschatology m Jewish and Christian Apocalypticism [Leiden: Brill, 1996] 55-138). 72 Momigliano, "From the Pagan to the Christian Sibyl," 738. 73 Flusser, "The four empires," 171. The Bahman Yasht refers to the "tenth century" of Zoroaster. 74 In Aeneid 1. 257-98, Virgil has Jupiter reveal the future of Aeneas's descendants, to whom he has given imperium sine fine, but even this vaticinium ex eventu lacks the universal scopc that we find in the Jewish sibyllina.

can not be ruled out. The theme of universal history is far better attested in the Jewish sibylline oracles than in their pagan counterparts. T h e shape of the sibylline oracles that have come down to us is more likely to be the innovation of the Jewish pseudepigraphers than a feature of pagan oracles that are no longer extant. Conclusion The reviewer's claim, noted at the beginning of this essay, that Parke's masterly book had rescued the sibyl from the fringes of the Jewish pseudepigrapha, betrays a rather short-sighted view of the sibylline tradition and its significance in western culture. T o be sure, its roots lay in pagan antiquity, and Parke's book is a splendid introduction to that part of the tradition. But the leaves of Cumae were lost in the wind, and the literary heritage of the pagan sibyl is meager indeed. T h e books collected in the Byzantine period were primarily Jewish and partly Christian in character. They included enough conventional sibylline verses about various catastrophes to lend credibility to the pseudonym under which they were published. But they also transformed the pagan oracles into a new literary form, characterized by a sweeping view of universal history and a concern with ethical teaching which was alien to the pagan sibyl. The pseudonymous authors of these books were not peripheral to the tradition. It was they who rescued the sibyl from a dying culture and made her a reputable prophet in the Christian Middle Ages.

CHAPTER T H I R T E E N

T H E SIBYL AND T H E P O T T E R : POLITICAL PROPAGANDA IN PTOLEMAIC EGYPT

Much of the literature of the Hellenistic Jewish Diaspora is generally held to have been written with propagandists or apologetic intent. This is especially true of literature with Gentile pseudonyms (the Sibyl, Aristeas) or composed in traditional Greek forms (the tragedy of Ezekiel, the epic of Philo).1 It is unnecessary to prolong the debate as to whether the primary audience of this material was Jewish or Gentile. 2 Propaganda typically bolsters the security of the propagandist group by addressing the world around it, whether or not that world is prepared to listen. The Jews of the Hellenistic Diaspora were first of all working out their own identity, as people who were Jewish by religion and Greek by culture. There is ample evidence that they welcomed the affirmation of Gentiles who embraced Jewish religious practices in various degrees.3 Much of the propaganda of Hellenistic Judaism is religious in nature. It proclaims the one God, denounces idolatry and certain sexual offences, and argues that some apparently irrational Jewish practices (such as the dietary observances) admit of a spiritual, allegorical interpretation. 4 The Sibylline Oracles certainly participate in this religious propaganda. Long passages are devoted to oudining true religious observance. 5 But the Sibyllines difTer from most of the Diaspora literature in so far as their propaganda also has an overt political element. The twelve books of Oracles represent a long tradition over several hundred years, and the political emphases

1

See e.g. E. Schuerer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 135) (rev. and ed. G. Vermes, F. Millar and M. Goodman; Edinburgh: Clark, 1986) 617-18. See also the remarks of Dieter Georgi, The Opponents of Paul in Second Corinthians (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986) 83-51. It is a pleasure to oifer this essay to Dieter Georgi, who was a reader on my dissertation committee and contributed much to my education in Hellenistic Judaism. 2 V. Tcherikover, 'Jewish Apologetic Literature Reconsidered," Eos 48(1956) 169-93, 3 L.H. Feldman, Jew and Gentile in the Ancient World (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993) 288-382. 4 J J . Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem. Jewish Identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora (New York: Crossroad, 1983) 137-74. 5 E.g. Sib O r 3:8-45; 218-64; 545-600; 715-31; 762-66. BC-AD

vary in the different books, and even within individual books.6 Here we shall focus on the fountainhead of the tradition, in Egyptian Judaism in the Hellenistic period. ThefirstJeivish Sibyl Sibylline oracles were a ready medium for propaganda. 7 The author does not speak in his own voice, but conceals his identity under the pseudonym of the Sibyl. The choice of this pseudonym offered several advantages to a Jewish author of the second century BCE. She was a figure of great antiquity, known throughout the Hellenistic world. The Sibyl had apparently originated in Asia Minor, but Sibylline oracles were extant in Italy by the late sixth century BCE. 8 Sibyls and Sibylline oracles multiplied in the Hellenistic period, so that Varro, the Roman antiquarian, could list ten sibyls (none of them Jewish) in the first century BCE.9 In view of this proliferation, it is not surprising that Jews should claim a Sibyl too. She offered a medium that was analogous to Hebrew prophecy, in so far as it allowed extended discourses, unlike the circumscribed responses of the oracular shrines. Like the Hebrew prophets, the Sibyl relied on assertion, backed by a claim of inspiration, rather than argument. Propaganda is most effective when it appears to state what is the case, rather than invite rational thought. Sibylline oracles also allowed considerable flexibility in their contents. The form required Homeric hexameters, and so presupposed a certain level of Greek education, but otherwise consisted of predictions that "when certain conditions obtain, something will happen." 10 Repetition is endemic to the genre, as the loosely structured collections go over the same ground again and again, and thereby implant it ever deeper in the consciousness of the reader or listener. The credibility of the Sibyl is enhanced by frequent "prediction" of things that have already happened, a device made possible by the supposed antiquity of the Sibyl. 6

J.J. Collins, "The Development of the Sibylline Tradition," ANRW 11.20.1 (1987) 421-59; D.S. Potter, Prophecy and History in the Crisis of the Roman Empire. A Historical Commentary on the Thirteenth Sibylline Oracle (Oxford: Clarendon, 1990). 7 See the discussion of propagandistic techniques, with reference to Egyptian oracles, by A.B. Lloyd, "Nationalist Propaganda in Ptolemaic Egypt," Historia 31(1982) 33-55. 8 H.W. Parke, SibyL· and Sibylline Prophecy in Classical Antiquity (ed. B.C. McGing; London and New York: Routledge, 1988) 51-99. 9 Lactantius, Divinae Institutiones 1.6.8-12. Varro did not mention cither a Jewish or a Babylonian sibyl. Pausanias is the first pagan author to mention a Jewish sibyl, named Sabbe, and he says that others call her Babylonian or Egyptian (Potter, Prophecy and History, 107). 10 Potter, Prophecy and History, 104.

The third book of Sibylline Oracles is a loosely structured accumulation of oracles, which grew by addition and insertion over a period of a century and a half." Some passages, such as Sib Or 3: 46-92, clearly date to the Roman era (after the batde of Actium in 31 BCE). There is general agreement, however that the nucleus of the book (vss. 97-294; 545-808) dates from the mid-second century BCE. The key to the dating lies in three references to the "seventh king" of the Greek dynasty, who must be identified either as Ptolemy VI Philometor (180-164 and 163-145 BCE), if Alexander the Great is counted as the first king, or his short-lived successor Ptolemy VII Neos Philopator (145-44 BCE). 1 2 If there is a central theme in these oracles, it is the call to the Greek world to honor the Most High God and offer sacrifices in his temple (vss. 624-34; 716-18). The sibyllist is unabashed in praise of the Jewish people and their way of life (218-64; 702-13), and regularly justifies predictions of doom with moral condemnation (185-86 on Roman pederasty; 601-07 on idolatry). The exhortations, however, are framed by political prophecies. A long oracle on world kingdoms in vss. 162-95 concludes with a denunciation of Rome, which will "fill everything with evils," but especially Macedonia, which was divided by Rome after the battle of Pydna in 168 BCE and annexed as a Roman province in 147 BCE. Then, we are told, in "the seventh reign, when a king of Egypt, who will be of the Greeks by race, will rule... the people of the great God will again be strong." Some scholars have seen here an allusion to the Maccabean revolt, which took place during the reign of Philometor. 13 If so, this is the only acknowledgement of the Maccabees in the book, and it is a faint one. It is more likely that the rise of the people of God is a real prophecy, as yet unfulfilled. This passage does not explicidy state that the seventh king of Egypt will be responsible for the rise of the people of God, but the fact that they rise in his reign invites that inference. The other references to the seventh king are also elliptic. In vs. 318 we find that Egypt will be torn by civil strife in the reign of the seventh king, but then will rest. There was civil war between Philometor and his " J . J . Collins, The Sibylline Oracles of Egyptian Judaism (SBLDS 13; Missoula: Scholars Press, 1974) 24-33; "The Sibylline Oracles," OTP 1.354-61. 12 The thesis of V. Nikiprowetzky, La Troisième Sibylle (Paris: Mouton, 1970) 215, that the seventh king was Cleopatra VII, has found no followers. Nikiprowetzky was led to this position by his desire to preserve the unity of the book. 13 So A. Momigliano, "La Portata Storica dei Vaticini sul Settimo Re nel Terzo Libro degli Oracoli Sibillini," in Forma Futun. Studi in Onore del Cardinale Michele Pellegrino (Turin: Erasmo, 1975) 1081.

brother, Euergetes II Physcon, and again briefly between Physcon and Philometor's widow, Cleopatra II.14 In vss. 608-9 we read that God will punish all people for idolatry "whenever the young seventh king of Egypt rules his own land, numbered from the line of the Greeks." The following verses go on to predict that "a great king will come from Asia" and overthrow the kingdom of Egypt. Antiochus IV Epiphanes conducted a successful invasion of Egypt in 170-69, at a time when Philometor was still a youth and under the tutelage of advisors.15 Whether the Sibylline reference is an allusion to this historical event is questionable, since there is no hint of Antiochus's disastrous second invasion, when he was humiliated by the Romans. It is more likely that historical reminiscences were incorporated into genuine predictions of future upheavals. None of these passages gives a clear picture of the role of the seventh king. There is, however, one passage that ascribes a more active role to king. Vss 652-6 predict: then God will send a king from the sun, who will stop the entire earth from evil war, killing some, imposing oaths of loyalty 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 identity of this king is the key to the political propaganda of the Sibyl. Many scholars have assumed that the reference is to a Jewish messiah and translated it as "from the east," by analogy with Isa 41:25 (LXX) where the phrase is "from the rising of the sun." 16 But "from the sun" does not mean "from the east," and in any case the Jewish messiah was not expected to come from the east. I argued in my dissertation twenty years ago that the phrase must be understood against the background of Egyptian mythology, where the king was understood as the son of the sun-god Re. 17 A precise parallel is found in the Potter's Oracle, a nearly contemporary piece of Egyptian nationalist propaganda in oracular form. 18 The fact that both the Sibyl and the Potter focus their expectations on a "king from the sun" invites a comparison between Jewish and Egyptian political propaganda in the Ptolemaic era.

14 15 16

P.M. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria (Oxford: Clarendon, 1972) I. 119-21. O. Morkholm, Antiochus IV of Syria (Copenhagen: Gyldcndal, 1966) 64-87. So Nikiprowetzky, La Troisième Sibylle, 133; Momigliano, "La Portata Storica,"

1081. 17

Collins, The Sibylline Oracles of Egyptian Judaism, 40-44. T h e parallel was noted by E. Norden, Die Geburt des Kindes (Leipzig: Teubner, 1924) 55η.2, 147. See also J. Gwyn Griffiths, "Apocalyptic in the Hellenistic Era," in Apocalypticism in the Hellenistic World and in the Near East (ed. D. Hellholm; Tübingen: Mohr, 1983) 290. 18

The Potter's Oracle The Potter's Oracle stands in a tradition of native Egyptian propaganda, exemplified in such works as the Oracle of the Lamb to Bocchoris and the Demotic Chronicle.9‫ י‬It survives in three fragmentary papyri from the second and third centuries CE,20 but it must date from the Hellenistic era, since it is directed against the Greeks, not the Romans. Like the Sibylline Oracles, this oracle is attributed to a legendary figure, a potter in the reign of King Amenhotep, 21 who acts as the incarnation of the creator god Khnum. This potter goes to the island of Helios-Re, where he proceeds to make pottery. The people, however, smash the pottery and drag the prophet before the king. T h e potter then interprets his action as a prophetic sign. 'Just as the pottery has been destroyed, so Egypt and, finally, the city of the followers of the evil god Typhon-Seth will be destroyed.'' 22 Then Egypt will prosper, when the king from the sun, who is benign for fifty five years, comes, the giver of good things, sent by the great goddess Isis, so that those who survive will pray that those who have already died may rise to share in the good things.

The Potter was buried in Heliopolis, the city of the sun. Ludwig Koenen argued that the papyrus fragments P 2 and P 3 of the Potter's Oracle represent two recensions of the oracle, which may be dated soon after 129 BC and 116 BC respectively.23 The dating depends on a quotation from the Oracle of the Lamb to Bocchoris, another Egyptian nationalist prophecy which dates from the Persian period. 24 The passage says that the true king is not the king of two years, but the one who will reign for fifty five years. (The reference to 55 years is missing in P2). Koenen argued that the king of two years was Harsiesis, who led an abortive revolt in 130-129 BCE, and

19 Gwyn Griffiths, "Apocalyptic in the Hellenistic Era," 273-93; Doyd, "Nationalist Propaganda in Ptolemaic Egypt," 33-55; F. Dunand, "L'Oracle du Potier et la formation de l'apocalyptique en Egypte," in L'Apocalyptique (ed. F. Raphael; Paris: Geuthner, 1977) 39-67. 20 See the edition of the text by L. Koenen, "Die Prophezeiungen des 'Töpfers'," ZPE 2(1968) 178-209. 21 There were four pharaohs of this name in the eighteenth dynasty (approximately 1550-1300 BCE. 22 Koenen, "The Prophecies of a Potter. A Prophecy of World Renewal Becomes an Apocalypse," Proceedings of the Twelfth International Congress of Papyrology (D.H. Samuel, ed.; Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1970) 249. 23 Koenen, "Die Prophezeiungen," 186-93 24 Griffiths, "Apocalyptic in the Hellenistic Era," 285-87.

that the ideal of fifty five years was devised to reject any claim on behalf of Ptolemy VIII Euergetes, who reigned for 54 years. Subsequent publication of the Oracle of the Lamb, however, showed that both numbers were already present in the older oracle. 25 At most, the Potter's Oracle may have applied the older oracle to Harsiesis and Euergetes, but the passage itself cannot have been composed to fit those situations. Already in his edition, Koenen had argued that the quotation from the Oracle of the Lamb was an interpolation in the Potter's Oracle, and in another essay he argued that a prophecy of the same kind as the Potter's Oracle was known to Callimachus, who made use of it in his Hymn to Delos.26 The Potter's Oracle, then was a fluid tradition, which was updated repeatedly in light of historical events. The use of the present participle ktizomenen with reference to Alexandria suggests that a stratum of the oracle dates from the beginning of the Hellenistic period. 27 However, the Oracle also refers to a king who will come down from Syria and will be hated by all. Antiochus Epiphanes was the first Syrian king to invade Egypt, and the Oracle presumably had this precedent in mind. The Potter's Oracle was still copied in the third century CE. If the Potter's Oracle evolved gradually over several generations as has been suggested, then it is quite possible that the Jewish sibyllist was familiar with it at some stage of its development, and borrowed from it the expression "king from the sun" for the expected deliverer. Inevitably, the expression takes on a different meaning in a Jewish context. The Sibyl was certainly not prophesying a restoration of native Egyptian kingship. The old Pharaonic ideology, however, was not the exclusive property of Egyptian nationalists in the Ptolemaic period. The Ptolemies themselves laid claim to the old Pharaonic titles.28 These titles were translated into Greek under Ptolemy IV Philopator and were applied in abundance to Ptolemy V Euergetes on the Rosetta Stone. Both these kings were called "son of the Sun." 29 The Ptolemy is also called "son of Re" in the texts inscribed at the temple of Edfu, and identified as Horus. 30 The Ptolemies supported the Egyptian priesthood, and in return were 25

Koenen, "A Supplementary Note on the Date of the Oracle of the Potter," ZPE 54(1984) 9-13. 26 L. Koenen, "Die Adaptation Ägyptischer Königsidcologic am Ptolemäerhof," in Egypt and the Hellenistic World (cd. W. Peremans; Studia Hellcnistica 27; Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1983) 184. 27 Griffiths, "Apocalyptic in the Hellenistic Era," 289-90. 28 Sec especially Koenen, "Die Adaptation Ägyptischer Königsideologie," 15229

Ibid., 155. ·‫ יי‬Griffiths, "Apocalyptic in the Hellenistic Era," 289.

recognized as the living Horus, even though the sincerity of the honor may be doubted. 31 A king from the sun, then, was not necessarily a native Egyptian king. The title could equally well be applied to "a king of Egypt from the line of the Greeks." In view of the importance attached to the reign of the seventh king in Sib O r 3, it is very probable that the king expected by the Sibyl was a benevolent Ptolemy. In fact, Ptolemy Philometor's benevolence to the Jews is well known. It was he who gave Onias IV land to build his temple at Leontopolis, quite near Heliopolis where the Potter was supposedly buried. Josephus claims that he set Onias and Dositheus over all his army, 32 and, even if we allow for some exaggeration, it is clear that Onias enjoyed high rank. 33 Aristobulus, the Jewish philosopher, was allegedly the teacher of Philometor. 34 It is understandable, then, that some Diaspora Jews, especially those who had fled from Jerusalem with Onias on the eve of the Maccabean revolt, would look to the Ptolemaic king as their potential savior. The Potter's Oracle and the Sibylline Oracle, then, put forward rival claims as to who was the true "king from the sun." For the Egyptian oracle, it was a native king who would overthrow the Greeks. For the Jewish Sibyl, it was the Ptolemaic king in whose reign Jerusalem would be restored. 35 Horus and. Seth Besides the obvious difference in their ultimate goals, however, there are other differences between the Potter and the Sibyl. The Potter's Oracle, no less than the Sibylline Oracle, champions the restoration of a particular cult. T h e divine statues will be restored to Egypt. The Potter lacks, however, the moral exhortation of the Sibyl. The 31 See the remarks of H.W. Fairman, The Triumph of Horus. An Ancient Egyptian Sacred Drama (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1974) 33. 32 AgAp 2.49. 33 A. Kasher, The Jews in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt (Tübingen: Mohr, 1985) 8. M 2 Macc 1:10. 35 In view of the consistent monotheism of the Sibyl, the title must bc taken as honorific. There are, however, a number of documents dating from the second century BCE. in which the contracting parties and witnesses are Jewish and which refer to the Ptolemies as gods (CPJ 1. 23, 24). Note also the existence of a syncretistic prayer, in Aramaic but in Demotic script, which calls for help on the Egyptian God Horus side by side with the God of Israel. See C.F. Nims and R.C. Steiner, "A Paganized Version of Psalm 20:2-6 from the Aramaic Text in Demotic Script," JAOS 103(1983) 261-74. Evidence for Jewish veneration of Helios comes mainly from the land of Israel, where the sun is depicted on several synagogue floors in the second to the fourth centuries. See Feldman, Jew and Gentile, 67, 483.

characteristically Jewish concerns about homosexuality and idolatry have no reflection in the Egyptian work. The most striking difference, however, concerns the different ways in which the political situation is symbolized. The Potter's Oracle evokes Egyptian myth not only in the phrase "king from the sun," but also in its labelling of the Alexandrian Greeks as "Typhonians." The Typhonians are the followers of Seth, the adversary of Horus. According to the myth, Seth revolts against Osiris and kills him. 36 The new king, Horus, takes revenge on Seth for his father. Every Egyptian king is Horus; all the enemies of Egypt are followers of Seth. The Potter's Oracle envisages the future after the pattern of the myth. The Ptolemaic rulers, who laid claim to the Egyptian mythology, were also identified with Horus. Callimachus, in his hymn to Delos, applies the myth of Horus (Apollo) and Seth (Ares) to the victory of Ptolemy II Philadelphus over the Gauls ("the Titans of a later day," vs. 174) in 275 BCE.37 The Gauls are said to wear posteras anaideas, just as the Greeks in the Potter's Oracle are said to be zönophoroi, girdle wearers.The victory of Ptolemy IV Philopator over Antiochus III at Raphia was commemorated in a decree which boasted that the Ptolemy slew his enemies as Horus, son of Isis had slain his foes.38 The Rosetta Stone proclaims Ptolemy V Euergetes to be "a god from a god and goddess just as Horus, the son of Isis and Osiris, the defender of his father Osiris." 39 The victory of Horus over Seth was protrayed on the walls of the temple at Edfu, and the Ptolemy was identified as Horus. 40 The myth could be applied in different ways by opposing factions. One of the native Egyptian rebels under Ptolemy VII Euergetes (Physcon) was named Harsiesis (Horus, son of Isis). In Ptolemaic propaganda, evidenced in a papyrus fragment, he was called ho theoisin echthros, the enemy of the gods.41

36 See J.G. Griffiths, The Conflict of Horus and Seth from Egyptian and Classic Sources (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 1960); H. tc Velde, Seth, God of Confusion. A Study of his Role in Egyptian Mythology‫ ׳‬and Religion (Leiden: Brill, 1967). 37 Koenen, "Die Adaptation ägyptischer Königsideologie am Ptolemäerhof," 174-90. 3 " H.J. Thissen, Studien zum Raphiadekret (Beiträge zur klassischen Philologie 23; Meisenheim am Glan: Hain, 1966) 7. 39 S.M. Burstein, The Hellenistic Agefromthe Battle of Ipsos to the Death of Cleopatra VII (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985) 132; C. Onasch, "Zur Königsideologie der Ptolemäer in den Dekreten von Kanopus und Memphis (Rosettana)," Archiv fur Papyrus Forschung 24/25(1976) 137-55 40 Fairman, The Triumph of Horus. 41 L. Koenen, "THEOISIN ECHTHROS Ein Einheimischer Gegenkönig in Aegypten (132/1)," Chronique d'Egypte 34(1959) 103-119.

The myth of Horus and Seth lent itself to political propaganda, because on the one hand it provided ready-made labels for heroes and villains. One of the simplest forms of propaganda consists of identifying an individual or group as a focal point of communal hatred. 42 Callimachus identified the Gauls as latter-day Titans. The Potter's Oracle identified the Alexandrians as Typhonians. Remarkably, however, no such enemy is identified in the earliest stratum of the Third Sibylline Oracle. The "king from the sun" plays the role of Horus, but no one is cast in the role of Seth. 43 The difference between the Sibyl and the Potter in this respect can be understood readily enough in view of their different relationships to the Ptolemaic rulers. The Potter's Oracle is a révolutionary document, aiming at the overthrow of the Greeks. The Jewish oracle, if it was written under Philometor, was addressed to a ruler who was well disposed. While there were various factions in Egypt in the mid-second century, the Sibyl does not wish to antagonize any of them unduly. There is no reflection here of the strained relations between the Jews and Physcon,44 and no sweeping denunciation of the nadve Egyptians.45 The Sibyl's denunciations of idolatry might be offensive to many in Egypt, but no political group is dismissed as an irredeemable enemy. More surprising, however, is the failure to denounce the Seleucids, the common enemy of Judaism and Ptolemaic Egypt in the time of Philometor.We have noted already that Antiochus Epiphanes had invaded Egypt in the time of Philometor, and may be the prototype of the "king from Syria, who will be hated by all" in the Potter's Oracle. We have also noted a possible reminiscence of this invasion in Sib O r 3:611-15, which tells how "a great king will come from Asia" and overthrow the kingdom of Egypt. But the Sibyl's attitude towards this figure is not at all clear. He is certainly not portrayed as an incarnation of Seth, and there is no reflection either of Antiochus' downfall or of his persecution of the Jews. 45 Lloyd, "Nationalist Propaganda," 34, citing J.A.C. Brown, Techniques of Persuasion (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1963) 28. 43 The Sibyl envisages an eschatological assault on the Temple, after the manner of Psalm 2, but the adversaries are identified in general terms as "the kings of the peoples" (3:663). 44 Josephus, AgAp 2.53-55; V. Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization and the Jews (New York: Atheneum, 1970) 282, Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria 1.121.. 45 Contrast in this regard the treatment of the Egyptians in Wisdom 15-19, which reflects the hostile relations of the first century CE. On the date of Wisdom I must agree with D. Winston, The Wisdom of Solomon (AB 43; Garden City, New Y Ū rk: Doubleday, 1979) 20-25, against D. Georgi, Weisheit Salomes (JSHRZ 3/4; Gütersloh: Mohn, 1980) 395-96.

The Sibyl's silence on Epiphanes stands in sharp contrast to the portrayal of the king in the nearly contemporary Book of Daniel, where the Gentile kingdoms are beasts that rise from the chaotic sea, and Epiphanes is an upstart horn on the fourth beast. The imagery of Daniel is drawn from Canaanite myth, filtered through a long history of Israelite usage.46 In the present context, however, it is worth noting that some scholars have argued that Daniel's vision should be understood against the backdrop of the myth of Horus and Seth. 47 There is in any case a basic structural similarity between the various combat myths of the eastern Mediterranean world and the Near East.4a A positive god of life, fertility or order (Baal, Marduk, Horus) does batde with a negative deity of disorder and chaos (Yamm, Tiamat, Seth). The imagery of all these myths was equally applicable to political propaganda, and the biblical tradition was not reticent in using mythological labels for political adversaries.49 If the Sibyl had shared Daniel's feelings about Antiochus Epiphanes, it would not have been difficult to portray him as a Typhonian figure.50 The Sibyl and the Maccabees We touch here on the controverted question of the Sibyl's attitude towards the Maccabean revolt. We have noted the possible allusion in Sib O r 3:194: "then the people of the great God will again be strong." Even if this is read as a reference to the revolt, it is a faint endorsement. I suggested in my dissertation that the sibyllist was a supporter of Onias IV, the exiled High Priest who enjoyed high rank under Philometor. 51 This hypothesis might explain the Sibyl's detachment from the cause of the Maccabees, who, from a Zadokite point of view, usurped the High Priesthood. There is certainly hope 45

For full discussion see the commentary on Daniel 7 in J.J. Collins, Daniel (Hermeneia: Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993). 47 J.W. van Hcntcn, "Antiochus IV a a typhonic figure in Daniel 7," in The Book of Daniel in the Light of Recent Findings. Colloquium Biblicum Lovaniense 1991 (ed. A.S. van der Woude; Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1993), 222-43, building on the suggestion o f J . C . H . Lebram, "König Antiochus im Buch Daniel," VT 25(1975) 737-72. 4B J . Fontenrose, Python. A Study of Delphic Myth and Its Origin (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1959). 49 See J . Day, God's conflict with the dragon and the sea. Echoes of a Canaanite myth in the Old Testament (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985). 50 Van Hcntcn, "Antiochus IV," argues that "it is likely that in Alexandrian circles Antiochus IV was ridiculed and associated with the typhonic," but the argument is a priori, and lacks supporting evidence. 51 Collins, The Sibylline Oracles, 52-53,'

in Sib O r 3 for a full restoration of the Jerusalem temple, and nothing to indicate that the restoration under the Maccabees was satisfactory. T h e lack of outrage against Antiochus Epiphanes might be explained if the Sibyl wrote in the later years of Philometor, when Epiphanes was dead and the Syrians no longer controlled Judea. In any case, the earliest Jewish Sibylline Oracles are remarkably irenic and posirive, when viewed in the context of the contemporary Egyptian propaganda and of Jewish apocalypses such as Daniel. They bear witness to an era ofJewish success in Egypt, when it was possible to dream of a glorious restoration of the Jerusalem temple under Ptolemaic patronage. Epilogue The positive relations between Jew and Gentile reflected in Sib O r 3 contrast sharply with the kind of propaganda we find in a later stage of the tradition, reflected in Sib Or 5, from the early second century CE. By then, relations between Jews and Egyptians had deteriorated to the point where the Jews were portrayed as the Typhonians in Egyptian propaganda. 52 A fragmentary papyrus from the time of the Jewish revolt under Trajan (115-117 CE) urges its readers to "attack the Jews," who are characterized as "lawbreakers once cast out from Egypt by the wrath of Isis."53 The text warns that Jews will inhabit the land, or city, of Helios.54 It also warns Egyptians not to let their city become desolate, presumably with reference to Memphis. The Jewish Sibyl, on the other hand, foretold the destruction of Memphis without compunction: Mighty Memphis, who formerly boasted most to wretched mortals, you will weep in dire straits and disastrous fate.55

She also predicts the destruction of Isis and Sarapis. The Sibyl does not make use of the myth of Horus and Seth, but the book is full of scathing denunciations of enemies, targeting Rome even more than Egypt. When the Fifth Sibyl looks for deliverance, the hope is no longer for a king from the sun but for a man from heaven (256, 414). 52 See David 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) 20320. 53 CPJ 520 (V. Tcherikover, A. Fuks, M. Stern and D.M. Lewis, Corpus Papyrorum Judaicarum (Cambridge: Harvard, 1964) 3. 119-21. Frankfurter, "Lest Egypt's City be Deserted," 208, also refers to an unpublished fragment from Oxyrhynchus. 54 The readings of the two fragments differ at this point. 55 Sib O r 5:63-65, cf. 180-81.

The book ends on a note of despair, with the extinction of all the stars. In fact, the conflict of propaganda between Jews, Greeks and Egyptians in Roman Egypt, which had raged throughout the Roman era and is only belatedly reflected in the Sibylline Oracles, 56 ended in the virtual extinction of Egyptian Judaism after the failure of the revolt.

56

Sec J.G. Gager, The Origins of Anti-Semitism (New York: Oxford, 1983) 43-66; Feldman, Jew and Gentile in the Ancient World, 84-176.

A SYMBOL O F OTHERNESS: C I R C U M C I S I O N AND SALVATION IN T H E FIRST C E N T U R Y

In Acts 15:1, we are told that some men came down from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the brethren that "unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses you cannot be saved," and that Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and debate with them. T h e position of these Judeans is often regarded as archetypically Jewish. Circumcision, after all, was the sign of the covenant with Abraham: This is my covenant which you shall keep, between me and you and your descendants after you: every male among you shall be circumcised...and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and you (Gen. 17:10-11).

Its importance is amply attested by the events of the Maccabean era and by the forcible circumcisions of the Hasmoneans. 1 While the custom was not uniquely Jewish, it was virtually synonymous with Judaism in the Roman period. The satirist Persius could speak simply of "the sabbath of the circumcised' 5 (Sat. 5.184). Tacitus held that Jews "adopted circumcision to distinguish themselves from other peoples by this difference. Those who are converted to their ways follow the same practice" (Hist. 5.2). Petronius, in a more derisive tone, says that The Jew may worship his pig-god and clamor in the ears of high heaven, but unless he also cuts back his foreskin with the knife, he shall go forth from the people and emigrate to Greek cities and shall not tremble at the fasts of Sabbath imposed by the law (Frag. 37).

There is no doubt that circumcision was widely perceived by Gentiles as a symbol of Judaism's otherness. The Pauline rejection of circumcision as a requirement for Gentiles was surely a significant factor in emergent Christianity's "breaking away" from its Jewish matrix. Yet Jewish views on circumcision and on the salvation of the Gentiles were not entirely uniform, so the conflict within the Christian community has been said to reflect an "internal Jewish debate." 2 In this essay I wish to review the spectrum of Jewish opinions in the 1 2

See R. Meyer, "peritemnô," 7Z)jVT6(1968) 72-84. H.D. Betz, Galatians (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979) 89.

Greco-Roman Diaspora, which was more diversified and generally less stringent than the homeland. I shall address three questions: 1 what did Jews demand of Gentiles, on the evidence of the socalled propaganda literature? 2 at what point was a Gentile considered to become a member of the Jewish community? 3 what can be said of the controversial category of "God-fearers" or Gentiles on the periphery of Judaism? The answers to these questions may help clarify how far the Christian dispute reflected an internal Jewish debate, and how far it resulted from new factors which were intrinsic to Christianity itself. 1. The Jewish propaganda literature By Jewish propaganda literature I mean those compositions which are ostensibly addressed to a Gentile audience. Whether these works were composed primarily for a Gentile audience or were rather intended to bolster the self-respect of the Jews has been disputed since Tcherikover's famous article.3 This question does not seem to me to admit of an unequivocal answer. Propaganda is often most effective with the home constituency, and it is probable that most readers of these works were Jews. Yet they obviously seek and claim the respect of the Greeks, and what better way to bolster self-respect than by winning the respect of others? 4 Whatever the case, these works do provide some specific indications of what Diaspora Judaism wanted from the Gentile world. I will consider four examples: the third Sibylline Oracle and the Letter of Aristeas from the Ptolemaic period, and, from the Roman, Pseudo-Phocylides and the fourth Sibylline Oracle. The main body of Sib. Or. 3 was composed in the second century BCE, probably in the reign of Ptolemy VI Philometor, who was exceptionally favorable to the Jews.‫ י‬The oracles have a strong political and eschatological interest. They expect a decisive turning point in the reign of "the seventh king of Egypt from the line of the Greeks" (vss 193, 318, 608), most probably either Philometor himself or his expected successor Neos Philopator. This king is referred to in 3 V. Tchcrikover, , Jewish Apologetic Literature Reconsidered," Eos 48(1956) 169-93. 4 See further my discussion in Between Athens and Jerusalem. Jervish Identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora (New York: Crossroad, 1983) 8-10. 5 J.J. Collins, ÌT1e Sibylline Oracles of Egyptian Judaism (SBLDS 13; Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1974) 21-34; "The Sibylline Oracles," in J . H . Charlcsworth, ed., The Old Testament Pseudeptgrapha (Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1983) 1.354-57.

Egyptian idiom as "a king from the sun" who will stop the entire earth from evil war. 6 The sibyl does not look immediately for Jewish independence but for a favorable Gentile monarch under whose patronage "the people of the great God will again be strong" and will be "guides in life for all mortals." 7 The oracles unabashedly praise the Jews as "a race of most righteous men" (219). Specific features which are singled out are rejection of astrology and superstition, practice of social justice (218-264) and avoidance of idolatry and homosexuality (573-600). These are presumably the ways in which they can serve as guides in life for all mortals. In a number of passages, however, the sibyl appeals directly to the Greeks: "To what purpose do you give vain gifts to the dead and sacrifice to idols? Who put error in your heart that you should abandon the face of the great God and do these things?" (547-549). The way for Greece to escape the din of war is "by offering the holocausts of oxen and loud-bellowing bulls...at the Temple of the great God." The sibyl does not expect immediate conversion: "you certainly will not sacrifice to God until everything happens," but "what God has planned will not go unfulfilled." (570-71). The Egyptian Sibyllines (Books 3 and 5, but also 11-14) are exceptional in Diaspora Judaism by their lack of belief in a judgment after death or resurrection. 8 Salvation is to be sought in this world. For the Jews it is a peaceful life around the temple free from war (702-09). For Greeks it is also life free from war and subjection. It is a collective, political state, not a matter of individual conversion. The requirements are the abandonment of idolatry and offering sacrifice at the temple of the great God, presumably in Jerusalem. These requirements are filled out in a few other passages. In vss. 624-634 the sibyl appeals to the Gentiles to turn back and be converted—by offering sacrifices to the immortal God and practising justice. In the eschatological time they will repent of idolatry, send to the temple and ponder the law of the Most High 6

Sib. Or. 3:652. Collins, The Sibylline Oracles, 40-43. The phrase "king from the sun" also occurs in the Egyptian Potter's Oracle. 7 Sib. Or. 3: 194-195. A. Momigliano, sees here an allusion to the Maccabcan revolt, but nothing else in Sib. Or. 3 supports this suggestion; "La portata storica dei vatdcini sul settimo re nel terzo libro degli Oracoli Sibillini," Forma Futuri• Studi in Onore del Cardinale Michele Pellegrino (Turin: Bottega d'Erasmo, 1975) 1077-84. Sib. Or. 3:767 would seem to imply that the Ptolemaic kingdom is an intermediate stage to be superseded finally by the kingdom of God. 8 M. Hengel disputes this in "Messianische Hoffnung und politischer 'Radikalismus' in der jüdisch-hellenistischen Diaspora," in D. Hellholm, ed., Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East (Tübingen: Mohr, 1983) 656 η.2. He points to Sib. Or. 4:178-190 which speaks of resurrecdon, and Sib. Or. 3:705ff. Sib.

(716-723). They are warned not to attack Jerusalem (732-40), to "shun unlawful worship," and to avoid adultery, homosexuality and infanticide (762-66). The requirements for salvation, then, are partly cultic and partly moral. While the salvation of the Gentiles is eschatological, the sibyl may have expected it in the fairly near future. What is notable for our present discussion is that the Greeks are never required to practise circumcision, observe the more distinctive commandments, or become Jewish. The focal point of conversion is worship of the true God in the Jerusalem temple. 9 Greek mythology is accommodated by an euhemeristic explanation in which Kronos and Zeus are reduced to human status (vss 110-115), but worship is restricted to "the most high God" or "the great God" who may, however, be conceived in Greek terms.10 The Letter of Aristeas is presented as a letter from one Greek to another, although it is patently composed by a Jew." Here there is no appeal for conversion. Indeed conversion is unnecessary, since 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 (Ep. Arist. 16).12

The purpose of the Letter is not to convert, but to win sympathy and admiration; it is full of expressions of praise for Jerusalem, the law and the wisdom of the translators. The author does not avoid the distinctive, separatist aspects of Jewish law, but defends them by means of allegorical interpretation. Moses fenced the people in so "that we might not mingle at all with any of the other nations" (139). What this means, however, is that they should be "free from all vain imaginations." This position can be appreciated by "leading Egyptian priests" who "call us men of God." This title applies to "those who worship the true God." The Epistle, like the sibyl, rejects Or. 4 cannot be assimilated to the same tradition as Sib. Or. 3 and 5, in view of their fundamentally different attitudes to temple worship. It is usually located in Syria or the Jordan valley. Sib. Or. 3:705fT does not speak of eternal life, but is concerned with the continuing generations of the Jewish people, as Hengcl himself admits. 9 Compare the traditional Jewish hope in Isa 2:2-4. ιω On the identification of the God of Judaism with Greek conceptions of God, see M. Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974) 1:261-261. Compare Artapanus, who adopts an cuhermeristic explanation of Egyptian cults and claims that Moses founded them, but appears to endorse the cults as useful. See Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem, 32-38. " Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem, 81-86. 12 Compare Celsus in Origcn, Contra Celsum, 1.24 and 5.41; Hcngcl, Judaism and Hellenism, 1.262.

polytheism and gives an euhemeristic explanation of its origin (128138). In doing so, the author could hope to win the respect of philosophically oriented Gentiles. 13 Judaism is presented as a nonviolent, non-aggressive philosophy (148). The sages selected for the work of translation are "men of the finest character and highest culture," versed in Greek as well as in Jewish literature (121). They "rejected a rough and uncouth manner...and never assumed an air of superiority to others" (122). They did not present themselves as members of an exclusive, chosen people. The attitude of the Epistle is well summed up by 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." 14

Both the sibyl and Ps. Aristeas praise Judaism explicidy. Ps. Phocylides does not even mention it. Jewish authorship is inferred from a few allusions to the Pentateuch. Since some of these concern relatively obscure points (e.g. 140: "If a beast of your enemy falls on the way, help it to rise") we might not expect a Gentile author to pick them out, but the issue is not beyond question. 15 Jewish authorship is supported by a reference to bodily resurrection (103104) and by the extensive parallels between these sayings and the summaries of Jewish law in Philo's Hypothetica 7.1-9 and Josephus' Against Apion 2. 190-219, but while Philo and Josephus claim to be summarizing Jewish laws, Ps. Phocylides does not. 16 The common material in Philo, Josephus and Ps. Phocylides concerns the network of family and social relations, and the characteristically Jewish polemic against adultery and homosexuality. Ps. Phocylides, however, lacks any polemic against idolatry; it even refers to the heavenly bodies as "blessed ones" (75, 163) and says that the dead will become "gods" (104). These allusions are not 13 M. Nilsson, Geschichte der Griechischen Religion (Munich: Beck, 1950) 2:546-52; G. Delling, "Monos Theos," Studien zum Neuen Testament und zum hellenistischen Judentum (Götüngen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1970) 391-400; H.W. Attridge, First Century Cynicism in the Epistles of Heraclitus, (HTS 29; Chico: Scholars Press, 1976) 13-23. 14 M. Hadas, Aristeas to Philocrates (New York: Harper, 1951) 62. 15 See P.W. van der Horst, The Sentences of Pseudo-Phocylides (SVTP 4; Leiden: Brill, 1978) 70-76. 16 J.E. Crouch, The Origin and Intention of the Colossian Haustafel (FRLANT 109; Götüngen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1972) 84-101; M. Küchler, Frühjiidische Weisheitstraditionen (Götüngen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1979) 207-318; Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem, 143-148.

incompatible with monotheism, and the expression heis theos esti sophos (vs. 54) may be taken to affirm it, but monotheism is scarcely an issue in these sayings. There is no question here of conversion to a specific cultic practice or of rituals such as circumcision.17 Salvation involves both the immortality of the soul and the resurrection of the body, but the only requirement that can be inferred is conformity to the ethic set forth in the sayings. In the public realm, too, we are told that "wisdom directs the course of lands and cities" (131). The Jewish law is an implicit contributor to this wisdom, but it is not explicitly acknowledged. There is no distinction here between Jew and Greek. The purpose of Ps. Phocylides has puzzled commentators. It is evidently not a proselytizing work nor can it be taken as propaganda for Judaism at all. If it was written by a Jew, the author does not appear to have attached importance to that fact. Some scholars have suggested that we have here the work of a "God-fearer"—i.e. a Gentile on the threshold of Judaism, familiar with the Torah from the preaching of the synagogue.18 The affinities with Philo and Josephus do indeed support a connection with the synagogue, but the identification of "God-fearers" is problematic, as we shall see later. If the work can stand as an example of Jewish teaching, it is remarkable for its lack of insistence on the distinctive aspects of Judaism. Our final example of Diaspora literature ostensibly addressed to Gentiles is Sib. Or. 4. This document comes from the late first century of the common era and differs from the Egyptian Sibylline tradition of Books 3 and 5 in significant ways: it rejects temple worship and expects a resurrection of the dead. 19 The typical Sibylline review of history culminates with the threat of the destruction of the world by fire. This impending threat provides the context for the sibyl's preaching: 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, 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 (Sib. Or. 4: 162-69).

17 Vs. 31 "Do not eat blood; abstain from foot sacrificed to idols," is an interpolation found in only one inferior manuscript. Another reference to "gods" in vs. 98 is unintelligible and must be emended. 18 Van der Horst, The Sentences, 76. 19 J J. Collins, "The Place of the Fourth Sibyl in the Development of the Jewish SibylIina/7JS25(1974) 365-80; "The Sibylline Oracles," 381-83.

This appeal is addressed to humanity at large. In the aftermath of the Jewish revolt, the plea to abandon daggers and murders may be addressed primarily to Jews. The baptism which the sibyl calls for cannot be equated with proselyte baptism, but is a symbol of repentance for Jews and Gentiles. As such, it may be compared to the baptism of John. There is no suggestion that those who wash their bodies in perennial rivers are thereby incorporated into the Jewish people. There is no appeal for circumcision of the Gentiles, or for proselytism at all. After the resurrection "as many as are pious" (hossoi d'eusebeousi) wiU live on earth again. This sibyl definitely rejects not only idolatry, adultery and homosexuality, but also animal sacrifice and even temples. Such a view of religion might appeal to philosophically sophisticated pagans, but it is at odds not only with popular pagan religion, but also with much of traditional Judaism. That it was written after the destruction of the temple is presumably a factor here, but other strands ofJudaism, including Sib. Or. 5, did not renounce temple worship in principle at this time. This brief sampling of Diaspora literature shows some variation, but also some dominant trends. What these Jews asked of Gentiles was primarily that they worship the one true God. This was usually thought to entail a rejection of idolatry. They also insisted on an ethical code with special emphasis on avoiding adultery and homosexuality. 20 The lack of reference to circumcision is impressive, even in contexts where we would expect to find it—e.g. Ezekiel the tragedian fails to mention it as a requirement for celebrating the Passover.21 Most of the works which have been regarded as propaganda literature show litde interest in proselytizing, but show a desire to share and be accepted in the more philosophically sophisticated strata of Hellenistic culture. Salvation is seldom restricted to membership of the Jewish people. 22 This literature may not represent all strata of Jewish society, but it represents a substantial body of opinion nonetheless. 20 See the discussion of "the common ethic" in Between Athens and Jerusalem, 141-168. 21 J.B. Segal, The Hebrew Passoverfromthe Earliest Times (London: Oxford, 1963) 24. 22 In "The Covenant as a Soteriological Category and the Nature of Salvation in Palestinian and Hellenistic Judaism," in R. Hamerton-Kelly and R. Scroggs, ed., Jews, Greeks and Christians, essays in honor of W.D. Davies (Leiden: Brill, 1976) 34-38, E. P. Sanders identifies different levels of salvation in Philo. The highest level is the vision of the Logos. Sanders concludes that "only some will see, but all of those who see will be Jews or proselytes,' ‫ י‬but adds "(with the possible exception of a few wise Gentiles)." In Prob. 73-75, Philo includes in the small number of the wise the seven sages of Greece, the Persian Magi, Indian Gymnosophists, as well as the Jewish Essenes.

II. Conversion andproselytism The literary remains of the Hellenistic Diaspora represent the views of well-educated Jews who saw themselves, in Philo's words, as "near to being citizens, because they differ little from the original inhabitants" (Mos. 1.35). Philo and Josephus claim that this form of Judaism was attractive to Gentiles. 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 (Mos. 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.23

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 (Spec. Leg. 2.62). Josephus claims that the Jews of Antioch were constantly attracting to their religious ceremonies multitudes of Greeks, and these they had in some measure incorporated into themselves (JW 7.3.3[45]).

There is some evidence of active proselytizing in Rome. In 139 BCE the Jews were allegedly expelled from Rome "because they attempted to transmit their sacred rites to the Romans." 24 The expulsion under Tiberius in 19 CE may have had a similar reason: "they were converting many of the natives to their customs." 25 Such 23 Seneca, in Augustine, De Civitate Dei, 6.11. M. Stern, Greek and Latin Authors on Jeivs and Judaism (Jcnisalcm: The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1974) 1:431. 24 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 cult of Jupiter Sabazius". A second docs not mention the Jews, and the third does not mention Sabazius. In "Sabazius and the Jews in Valerius Maximus: A Re-examination,"J&S 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. 25 Cassius Dio, Hist Romana 57.18.5a (Stern, Greek and Latin Authors, 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) 201-206.

active proselytizing is not well attested elsewhere,26 but Judaism attracted adherents throughout the Diaspora. The question that arises is at what point these people ceased to be "others" and were accepted as members of the Jewish people. In the Talmud, there are three requirements for a proselyte: circumcision, baptism and sacrifice.27 The requirements of baptism and sacrifice are not attested before the end of the first century. However circumcision of proselytes is clearly evidenced from the Maccabean era on, not only in the forcible circumcision of the Idumeans and Itureans by the Hasmoneans (Ant 13.9.1 [257-58] and 13.11.1 [318]), but also in the story of Achior's conversion in Judith 14:10. The Herods required Gentiles to be circumcised before they married into the family; some accepted and some declined.28 In the Roman Diaspora, the custom is attested by Tacitus (Hist. 5.2), Petronius (Frag. 37) and Juvenal (Sat. 14.99). Whether it was universally held as a requirement for conversion to Judaism has nonetheless been questioned from time to time.29 We may infer from Philo that there were some Jews in Alexandria who dispensed with the practice of circumcision. In his famous discussion of the limits of allegorical interpretation in Migr. Abr. 8994, Philo says: "such men I for my part should blame for handling the matter in too easy and oflhand a manner." He is in agreement with their allegorical understanding of circumcision as "the excision 26 Horace, Sal. 1.4.138-143, which is often cited in this context, does not necessarily refer to proselytizing at all, but may involve coercion for other purposes. See J . Nolland, "Proselytism or Politics in Horace, Satires 1.4.138-143," VC 33(1979) 347-55. 27 Β J . Bamberger, Proselytism in the Talmudic Period (New York: Ktav, 1968, first published in 1939) 42-55; G.F. Moore, Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era (New York: Scribners, 1971, first published in 1927) 331. S.J. Cohen, "Conversion to Judaism in Historical Perspective, , ‫ י‬Conservative Judaism 36(1983) 31-45, notes that the triple requirement is attributed to Rabbi Judah the Patriarch in Sifre Numbers 108, but docs not appear anywhere in the Mishnah. In "At the Crossroads: Tannaitic Perspectives on the Jewish-Christian Schism,1' in E.P. Sanders, A.I Baumgarten and A. Mendelson, ed., Jewish and Christian ά^-Βφηιύοη (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981) 2: 115-156, L.H. Schiffman argues that proselyte baptism is presupposed by Christian baptism, but this is by no means necessary. Tliere is some inherent probability that die practice of sacrifice by converts originated before the destruction of the temple, but neither requirement is attested in first-century stories of conversions such as, Joseph andAseneth and the story of Izates of Adiabene. 28 Ant. 16.7.6(225): Syllaeus the Arab refused, saying that if he complied he would be stoned to death by the Arabs. Ant 20.7.1 (139); Epiphanes of Commagene declined but Azizus of Emessa consented, in order to marry Drusilla, daughter of Herod Agrippa. Ant 20.7.3 (145); Polemo, king of Cilicia, was circumcised in order to marry Bcrnice. When the marriage collapsed he abandoned Judaism again. 29 Recently, N.J. McElcney, "Conversion, Circumcision and the Law," NTS 20(1974) 328-333.

of pleasure and all passions, and the putting away of the impious conceit," but argues that literal observance is to the spiritual as the body is to the soul, and cannot be neglected. What is noteworthy, however, is the tolerant tone of his disapproval. He stops far short of denying that the allegorizers are authentic Jews or members of the covenant people. While he presents his view strongly, he presents it as simply his own opinion, and he was not in a position to impose his opinion on the whole Jewish community. Insofar as he shares their allegorical understanding, moreover, he may have felt more kinship with such people than with the literalists. The context of the discussion is the importance of good reputation. Philo comments that very many, after coming to Virtue's feet with no counterfeit or unreal homage and with their eyes open to her genuine loveliness, through paying no regard to the general opinion have become the objects of hostility, just because they were held to be bad, when they were really

good (Migr. Abr. 86). If this refers to the allegorists, it would seem that Philo was rather sympathetic to them, while other elements in the Jewish community were far more hostile.30 Philo defends the need for literal observance of circumcision, but he does not simply affirm it as "a sign of the covenant." He is at pains to justify it in terms that will appear respectable to a Greek. 31 On the one hand, he emphasizes its hygienic value.32 On the other, he accords primacy to its allegorical significance (the excision of pleasure and conceit).33 He can even derive support from the Egyptians, "a race regarded as pre-eminent for its populousness, its antiquity and its attachment to philosophy" (Spec. Leg. 1.2), although elsewhere he calls them "a worthless breed, whose souls were infected with the poison and bad temper alike of the crocodiles and asps of their country" (Leg. ad Gaium, 166-70). Philo does not treat

30 P. Borgen, Paul Preaches Circumcision and Pleases Men (Trondhcim: Tapir, 1983) 43, 71, argues that there was some persecution of those who abandoned circumcision, and draws an analogy with Paul. 31 For a summary of Philo's statements on circumcision, secJ.Z. Smith, "Fcnces and Neighbors: Some Contours of Early Judaism," in Imagining Religion: From Babylon to Jonestown (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1982) 14. 32 Spec. Leg. 1.4-7. Philo lists four allegedly traditional arguments in favor of circumcision: freedom from ulceration, cleanliness, assimilation to the heart and increased fertility. 33 Spec. Leg. 1.8-11; Qyaest in Gen. 3.46-52 (on Gen 17:10-14). The symbolic understanding of circumcision as circumcision of the heart was widespread already in the biblical period. Cf. Lev 26:41; Dcut 10:16, 30:6; Jer 4:4, 9:25; Ezek 44:7,9. Also 1QS 5:5.

circumcision as a central symbol of ethnic or religious identity,34 but the extent of his apologia shows his awareness that it was widely so regarded (cf. also Q]uaest in Gen. 3.46-52). Philo's allegorical understanding of the significance of circumcision inevitably detracts from the importance of the physical rite, even though he defends that too. Philo could have agreed with Paul that "he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly nor is true circumcision something external and physical. He is a Jew who is one inwardly and real circumcision is a matter of the heart, spiritual and not literal" (Rom 2:28-29). In view of Philo's comments on the alllegorists, we must allow that there were some ethnic Jews who abandoned circumcision without repudiating Judaism, however much other Jews may have "blamed" them. Of course, this could also be said of the Hellenizers before the Maccabean revolt. However they were a rather different case because of their political ambitions. We do not know how numerous these allegorizers may have been, but their existence shows that the absolute link between circumcision and Judaism which Petronius righdy or wrongly perceived in Rome could not be presumed in all areas of the Diaspora. 35 The question of circumcision is, of course, more likely to be controversial in the case of a convert than in the case of an ethnic Jew. Philo's pronouncements on the matter leave room for debate. In Quaest in Ex. 2.2, he argues that "in reality the proselyte is one who circumcises not his uncircumcision but his desires and sensual pleasures and the other passions of the soul. For in Egypt the Hebrew nation was not circumcised." The implication of this passage is surely that circumcision is not an essential prerequisite for membership of the Hebrew nation. Harry Wolfson saw here a reference to "spiritual proselytes" or "God-fearers," and contrasted them with the "full proselytes" to whom Philo refers elsewhere.36 34

J.Z. Smith, "Fences and Neighbors," 14: "For Philo, the practice seems to have litde to do with either ethnic or religious identity." 35 P. Borgen, "The Early Church and the Hellenistic Synagogue," in Paul Preaches Circumcision and Pleases Men, 68-69, finds "also in other writings hints.. .which suggest that there were Jews who ignored circumcision." The example which he cites from Ignatius, Philad. 6.1 discourages learning Judaism from the uncircumcised, but docs not say that the latter are Jews (despite the interpretation offered by C.K. Barrett, "Jews and Judaizcrs in the Episdcs of Ignatius," in HamertonKelly and Scroggs, ed., Jews, Greeks and Christians, 234,242). Borgen also adduces Abot of Rabbi Nathan 26 and related rabbinic material, but again, this does not direcdy support his case. See also his "Debates on Circumcision in Philo and Paul," ibid., 15-32. 36 Spec. Leg. 1.52; 308-309; Virt. 103,104. Wolfson, Philo (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard, 1948) 2:370. Compare also F. Siegert, "Gottesfürchtige und Sympathisanten,"J^74(1973) 123.

The other passages do not mention a requirement of circumcision either, and the distinction between two kinds of proselyte has no basis in Philo's terminology. In view of the passage in Migr. Abr. 8994, we may assume that Philo would "blame" a convert who did not fulfil the literal commandments, including circumcision, but the ritual is not an entrance requirement and its omission does not necessarily exclude the proselyte from the Jewish community, at least in theory.37 Philo's position here may be compared to that ascribed to R. Joshua in the Babylonian Talmud (Teb. 46a). R. Eliezer is said to have held that one who is circumcised but not baptized is a convert, as in the case of the Jews at the Exodus. R.Joshua maintained that one who is baptized but not circumcised is a convert, like the Israelite women at the Exodus. The sages insisted on both requirements. In the Jerusalem Talmud (j. Kid. 3.14.64d), R.Joshua is said to have required both circumcision and baptism. Bamberger argues that the Jerusalem version is the "correct" one and that even the Babylonian text "cannot mean that R. Joshua permitted conversion without circumcision," for "how indeed could R. Joshua have flouted the direct written word of the Torah?" 38 The issue, however, is not what R. Joshua actually held but what was the view attributed to him, and this cannot be decided by a priori considerations. Neither R. Joshua nor Philo is suggesting that circumcision be abandoned. The question is simply at what point a convert becomes a Jew, whether circumcision is a prerequisite for entry, or a duty consequent on admission.39 The view attributed to R.Joshua in the Babylonian Talmud is the latter, and it was evidently not accepted by the sages. Philo's position seems to be similar. Both discussions are theoretical, and do not prove the actual existence of uncircumcised proselytes, but they have at least potential significance nonetheless.40

37 Borgen, "The Early Church," 67: "bodily circumcision was not the requirement for entering the Jewish community, but was one of the commandments which they had to obey after having received the status of Jews." Borgen compares the position of Hillel in b. Shabbath 31 a, which docs not, however, address this question dirccdy. See also N.J. McEleney, "Conversion," 328-29. J. Nolland, "Uncircumcised proselytes?" JSJ 12(1981) 173-79, against McElency, infers from Migr. Abr. that Philo would have insisted on circumcision. 38 Bamberger, Proselytism, 46-52. Compare W.G. Braude, Jewish Proselytizing in the First Five Centuries of the Common Era (Providence: Brown, 1940) 76. 39 S. Bialoblocki, Die Beziehungen des Judentums zu Proselyten und Proselytentum (Berlin: Nobels Kulturbibliothek, 1930) 15. 40 Bamberger, Proselytism, 51.

When Philo speaks of proselytes, he ignores the ritual aspect of conversion and pays far greater attention to its social aspects. Proselytes, he says, should be accorded every favor and consideration and equal rank with the native born because they have left their country, their kinsfolk and their friends for the sake of virtue and religion. Let them not be denied another citizenship or other ties of family and friendship... 4 1

Religion was an integral part of civic life in the Hellenistic and Roman cities. Jewish monotheism might win the respect of the philosophically sophisticated, but proselytes who abandoned the worship of pagan gods would thereby be cut off from many civic and social activities. Jews as a group did not enjoy full citizenship in Alexandria or other cities of the Diaspora in the first century, 42 and so the status of proselytes must have been ambiguous. Atheism, or refusal to worship the gods, was at least a scandal, perhaps a crime. 43 Jews were exempt from this charge (at least by custom), but the status of the proselyte was less clear.44 Consequendy, proselytes could on occasion be persecuted, as we know from the case of Flavius Clemens under Domitian, although this seems to have been exceptional. 45 Quite apart from the legal ramifications, however, conversion to Judaism involved a major social transition. Philo explains Balaam's oracle "Behold, a people will dwell alone and among the nations it will not be reckoned," as follows: not because their dwelling-place is set apart and their land severed from others, but because in virtue of the distinction of their peculiar customs they do not mix with others to depart from the ways of their fathers (Mos. 1.278).

Even Jews who minimized their observance of strange customs would still be set apart socially if they refused to worship the pagan 41

Spec. Leg. 1.52. Cf. Spec. Leg. 1.308-309; Virt. 103,104. Smallwood, The Jews under Roman Rule, 227-230. The decisive evidence is found in the letter of Claudius. See also S. Applebaum, "The Legal Status of the Jewish Communities in the Diaspora," in S. Safrai and M. Stern, ed., The Jewish People in the First Century, Compendia Rerum Iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum, (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974) 1.420-463. 43 J . Juster, Les Juifs dans l'Empire Romain (Paris: Geuthner, 1914) 1:254-259. R. MacMullen, Paganism in the Roman Empire (New Haven: Yale, 1983) 62: "to deny the reality of the gods was absolutely unacceptable. You would be ostracized for that, even stoned in the streets." 44 V. Tchcrikover, Hellenistic Civilisation and the Jews (New York: Atheneum, 1970) 306: "there exists no document which exempts the Jews from participating in the worship of the gods." 45 Smallwood, The Jews under Roman Rule, 378-83. 42

gods. The objection against Jewish claims to citizenship, from Alexandria to Ionia, was that they did not worship the gods of their neighbors. 4 " Practical monotheism, with its social consequences, was a more significant dividing line between Jew and Gentile than an individual ritual such as circumcision. Conversion to Judaism involved joining a new community and being accepted as a member of a synagogue. 47 We may assume that synagogues would normally have insisted on circumcision, but in a place like Alexandria there may have been exceptions. The most elaborate literary account of a conversion from the Diaspora is found in the romance Joseph and Aseneth. The portrayal of the conversion process here accords well with what we have seen in Philo. Aseneth is a representative or model proselyte. 48 In 15:6 she is told that in future she will be called "city of refuge," and those who attach themselves to the Lord through repentance will be protected by her "wall." Since she is a woman, the issue of circumcision does not arise, but the fact that the main literary portrayal of the proselyte experience from the Hellenistic Diaspora concerns a woman should perhaps warn us not to attach too much importance to circumcision. In fact, Aseneth's conversion is not marked by any ritual. The episode of the honeycomb describes a mystical experience of some sort, but it is not a repeatable rite.49 The formulaic references to eating the bread of life, drinking the cup of immortality and anointing with the oil of incorruption are most satisfactorily explained as a reference to the entire Jewish way of life (8:5-6 and 15:4).50 When Joseph first meets Aseneth, he tells her that it is not fitting for a pious man (andn theosebei) who blesses with his mouth the living God and eats the blessed bread of life and drinks the blessed cup of immortality and anoints himself with the blessed oil of incorruption to kiss an alien woman who blesses dead and d u m b idols with her mouth and eats from their table bread of strangling and drinks from their libations a cup of treachery and anoints herself with oil of perdition. 51 46

For Alexandria, AgAp. 2.65; for Ionia, Ant. 12.3.2 (126). J.Z. Smith, "Fences and Neighbors," 15, notes that affiliation with a synagogue is one of the most common items noted in Jewish epitaphs from antiquity. Note also the rabbinic maxim that the rejection of idolatry is the acknowledgement of the whole law (Sifre Numbers 111, Sifre Deut 54, Megilla 13a, Moore, Judaism, 1:325). 4 " C. Burchard, Untersuchungen zu Joseph und Aseneth (Tübingen: Mohr, 1965) 119; Collins, Betiveen Athens and Jerusalem, 217. 49 On the alleged affinities of Joseph and Aseneth with mystery religions see D. Sanger, Antikes Judentum und die Mysterien (WUNT 2/5; Tübingen: Mohr, 1980). 50 Burchard, Untersuchungen, 86. M. Philoncnko, Joseph et Aseneth: Introduction. Texte Critique et Notes (Leiden: Brill, 1968) 91, attempts to identify a ritual here. 51 I follow the text of C. Burchard, "Ein vorläufiger griechischer Text von Joseph und Aseneth," Dielheimer- Blatter zum Alten Testament \ 4(1979) 2-53. 47

Since the eating and drinking are predicated of Joseph as a pious man, they cannot be a ritual of initiation but must refer to the habitual practice of the pious Jews. The point of distinction from Gentiles is, again, the rejection of idolatry and its attendant sacrifices and social functions. Even before the encounter with Aseneth, we learn that Joseph does not eat with the Egyptians, although he is the ruler of all Egypt (7:1 and 20:9). The actual conversion of Aseneth takes place when she throws away the idols which she formerly worshipped (10:13). Her acceptance into the Israelite community takes place when Joseph embraces her—that is, admits her to the social intimacies from which she previously had been excluded. It is consolidated when she marries Joseph and acknowledges Jacob as her father. The network of social relations gives external expression to the conversion that has taken place inwardly. Joseph and Aseneth is of course a fiction. It tells us an author's ideal, not the historical custom. It is very doubtful that a Jew in Egyptian service could remain as socially aloof as Joseph. Yet in the Ptolemaic era it was possible for Jews to rise in the government service without abandoning Judaism and probably without engaging in idolatry.52 Joseph and Aseneth posits good relations between Joseph and the Egyptians. Pentephres is an Egyptian priest, and Joseph does not eat with him (7: 1), but Pentephres is glad to give his daughter, and he blesses the God ofjoseph (3:3; 20:7). Both he and the pharaoh might be taken to represent pagan sympathizers with Judaism, although neither observes any Jewish laws.53 Whether such people can attain salvation (which for Joseph and Aseneth is immortality) is not really discussed. Aseneth was "dead" before her conversion, but then she was not especially sympathetic to the God of Israel at that point either. 54 The best known story of an historical conversion to Judaism in the Diaspora is the story of the royal house of Adiabene 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

52

The priest Onias, founder of Leontopolis, was a general in the army of Philometor (Josephus, AgAp 2.49). See P.M. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria (Oxford: Clarendon, 1972) 1.83-84. 53 See M. Philonenko, Joseph et Aseneth, 51. 54 The conclusion of Sanders ("The Covenant as a Soteriological Category," 23) that "Outside ofJudaism there is no salvation" seems to me more unequivocal than the text warrants.

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 devoted 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 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. This fascinating story gives rise to several problems. There is no reason to doubt the report that the conversion took place in two stages, but it is difficult to know how far the interpretative comments are supplied by Josephus himself rather than by the characters to whom they are attributed. Izates is in many ways an atypical proselyte. He is, after all, about to become king, and so his case involves political complications." We know little of conditions in Adiabene and whether they were at all similar to the western Diaspora. Yet some conclusions can be drawn on the basis of Josephus' narrative. Ananias justifies his position with a general theological principle—it is possible to worship God without circumcision. This is not simply a matter of expediency. 5 ‫'׳‬Josephus must have been aware of this principle. As we have seen, it had some support in Alexandria

55 Jacob Neusncr, A History of the Jews in Babylonia: I. The Parthian Period, (BJS 62; Chico California: Scholars Press, 1984, original publication Leiden: Brill, 1969) 6167. 56 Contra Bamberger, Proselytism, 51.

and even in rabbinic Judaism. 57 This principle, however, is qualified here in two respects. First, Izates' mother implies that his subjects would not regard him as a Jew if he was not circumcised, and this accords with Izates' own initial senriment. 58 Second, the assurance the God would pardon the omission suggests that it is normally culpable. Izates is excused because of "necessity," just as a dispensation might be given to a hemophiliac. The latter point, however, is compatible with the view that circumcision is not an entry requirement but an obligation consequent to admission. 59 The story is regrettably elliptical on Izates' status and practice after his conversion but before his circumcision. We are told that he read the law, but we are not told whether his devotion to the ancestral laws of the Jews extended to Sabbath observance or dietary laws, or whether he abandoned all worship of pagan gods. If he did, would this not have upset his subjects as much as circumcision? Further, while his subjects would not have regarded him as a Jew until he was circumcised, it is not clear how he was regarded by Ananias or by himself. 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 "God-fearers" who observed the Jewish laws but stopped short of circumcision. But this is far from certain. 60 It would seem, however, that "to worship God" means to do all that is necessary and so, presumably, to ensure salvation (in whatever sense) whether it qualifies one as a Jew or not. The ambiguity of Izates' case is heightened by his peculiar situation. For him, to become a Jew is not to join a synagogue, as it would have been in Alexandria or Rome. Izates' case rests on his internal decision to an unusual degree. The story of Izates corroborates the view that in popular perception circumcision was a major identifying sign of Judaism. It also shows that there was some difference of opinion within Judaism as to whether circumcision was necessary for salvation. What is not clear is whether Izates was for a time, by way of exception, an uncircumcised proselyte, or whether Ananias was affirming that one could worship God without converting to Judaism. In the peculiar 57 Besides the dispute in the Babylonian Talmud noted above, see also the disagreement between R. Eliezer and R. Joshua as to whether Gentiles have a share in the world to come (Tos. Sanhednn 13.2). See Siegert, "Gottesfurchtige," 119-120. 58 J . Nolland, "Uncircumcised Proselytes?"JS7 12(1981) 173-194, argues that Izates would be left "in sociological terms, something less than a Jew" (193). 59 Bialoblocki, Die Beziehungen, 15. 60 Siegert, "Gottesfürchtige," 129.

case of Izates, where the usual social complications may not have held, the difference may not be of ultimate importance. III. The "God-fearers" The story of Izates raises the question of the existence of "Godfearers," a class of pious Gentiles who stopped short of full acceptance of the law. The description of this class in the PaulyWissowa article of Kuhn and Stegemann is typical: they frequent the services of the synagogue, they are monotheists in the biblical sense, and they participate in 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.6'

Estimates of their number have been high ("perhaps millions").62 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." 63 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. 64 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 difTered."65 There is also some difference of opinion as to whether these "fearers of heaven" would attain salvation after death. The story of the Roman senator who gave his life to protect the Jews in Midrash Debarim Rabba 2.24 clearly implies that he would not have been

fil

K.G. Kuhn and H. Stcgcmann, "Prosclyten," PYVRE Sup 9(1962) 1260. Encyclopedia Judaica, 10:55. 6‫ג‬ A.T. Kraabel, "The Disappearance of the 'God-Fearers,‫" ׳‬Numen 28(1981) 121. 64 L.H. Feldman, 'Jewish 'Sympathizers' in Classical Literature and Inscripdons," TAPA 81(1950) 208; Siegert, "Gottesfürchtige," 110. 65 S. Liebermann, Greek in Jewish Palestine (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1942) 81. 62

saved if he had not been circumcised. 66 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. 67 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. 68 The non-technical sense is suggested in part by the strange distribution—phoboumenoi in the first half of Acts, sebomenoi in the second. The expression tön sebomenön prosely ton 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 certainly 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 Gentiles are found in Hellenistic Jewish literature before Josephus. In Joseph and Aseneth 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 14.7.2(110). This passage explains the wealth of the Jerusalem temple by reference to the contributions of ton kata ten oikoumenen Ioudaiön kai sebomenön ton theon. Even in this case the interpretation is disputed. Kirsopp Lake argued that since sebomenön 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." 69 Against this, the presence of the kai and the analogy with Acts supports the view that the sebomenoi are distinct (e.g. Acts 17:17: "he spoke in the synagogue, ‫ יי‬tois loudaiois kai tois sebomenois).70 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 inscriptions.71 Debate has centered on the occurrence of the Greek 66

Siegert, "Gottesfürchtige," 110-112. Liebermann, Greek in Jewish Palestine, 78-80. 68 K. Lake, "Proselytes and God-Fearers," in F.J. Foakes Jackson and K. Lake, ed., The Beginnings of Christianity: Part 1. The Acts of the Apostles (London: MacMillan, 1933) 74-96. 69 Lake, "Proselytes and God-Fearers," 85. 70 R. Marcus, "The Sebomenoi in Josephus," Jewish Social Studies 14(1952) 247250; Siegert,"Gottesfürchtige," 127. 71 Siegert, "Gottesfürchtige," 151. 67

term theosebës and the Latin metuens. The term theosebës 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. 72 Those, like Lifshitz, who find evidence for the "God-fearers'' in the inscriptions, 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.73 The problem with this procedure was noted by Feldman. 74 Both theosebës and metuens can be used in a pagan, polytheistic context. 75 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 CE inscription from Aphrodisias in Asia Minor. This inscription uses the term for a group that is distinguished from the Jews but associated with them. 76 Other occurrences must now be reconsidered in light of this: e.g., the problematic inscriptions from the Miletus theatre (.Eioudeön tön kai Theosebiöri), where the word order initially suggests one group, the Jews, rather than two, and the Pantikapaion inscription which refers to the synagogue, tön loudaiön kai theon seboon?1 It should be noted, however, that theosebës 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 theosebës in epitaphs or in the inscriptions from the Sardis synagogue remain quite ambiguous. Even in the Aphrodisias inscription it is not clear

72

Ant. 20.8.11 (195); Vit. 16. She was implicated in the murder of Agrippina and the banishment of Octavia. See Sicgert, "Gottesfürchtige," 160. 73 Β. Lifshitz, "Du Nouveau sur les "Sympathisants," JSJ 1(1970) 80: "Si donc ces demi-proselytes sont indubitablement attestés chez Josephe et dans le N T on les cherchait tout naturellement dans les inscriptions." 74 Feldman, 'Jewish 'Sympathizers'," 205. 75 For theosebës see G. Bertram, "theosebës, theosebeia," TONT 3( 1965) 123-128. In the phrase detim metuens, deum may be genitive plural (Siegcrt, "Gottesfürchtige," 152). 76 J.M. Reynolds and R. Tannenbaum, Jews and Godfearers at Aphrodisias (Cambridge Philological Society, 1987). (This inscription had not been published when this article was written). 77 Sec L. Robert, Nouvelles Inscriptions de Sardes (Paris: Maisonneuve, 1964) 41, and T. Rajak, "Jews and Christians as Groups in a Pagan World," i n j . Neusner and E.S. Frcrichs, ed., "To See Ourselves av Others See Us." Christians, Jews, "Others," in Late Antiquity (Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1985) 247-81.

what qualifies a person as a member of the theosebeis.78 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. 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.79 In the same passage, 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. 80 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 Gentile 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' claim that the Jews of Antioch partially incorporated Gentile admirers. Josephus further claims that T h e masses h a v e long since shown a keen desire to a d o p t o u r religious observances; a n d there is not o n e city, G r e e k or b a r b a r i a n , n o r a single nation, to which o u r custom of abstaining f r o m work on the seventh day has not spread, a n d w h e r e fasts a n d the lighting of lamps a n d m a n y of o u r prohibitions in the m a t t e r of food are not observed

(AgAp. 2.282). This claim is corroborated by frequent allusions to Jewish customs in the Roman satirists from the time of Augustus.81 Much of the Roman evidence suggests a rather superstitious curiosity, although it could lead in time to full conversion (cf. Juvenal's fourteenth satire, 78 See the comments of A.T. Kraabel, "Synagoga Caeca: Systematic Distortion in Gentile Interpretations of Evidence for Judaism in the Early Christian Period," in Neusner and Frerichs, ed., "To See Ourselves," 219-46. 79 The argument was developed by j . Bernays, "Die G0ttesfìirchtígen bei Juvenal," Gesammelte Abhandlungen von Jacob Bernays (Berlin: Hertz, 1885) 2:71-80. 80 Siegert, "Gottesfürchtige," 152 81 On the Roman reception of Judaism see M. Stern, "The Jews in Greek and Latin Literature," in Safrai and Stern, ed., The Jewish People in the First Century, 2: 1101-1159; J . G . Gager, The Origins of Anti-Semitism: Attitudes Toward Judaism in Paganism and Christian Antiquity (Oxford: Oxford University, 1983). Even Augustus is said to have boasted that "not even a Jew, my dear Tiberius, observes the Sabbath fast as faithfully as I did to-day" (Suetonius, Augustus, 76). See also R. Goldenberg, "The Jewish Sabbath in the Roman World up to the Time of Constantine the Great," in H. Temporini and W. Haase, ed., ANRW II. 19.1 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1979) 414-447.

where the father observes the sabbath and the son is eventually circumcised). The distinction between the partially observant father and fully converted son is supported by Epictetus' reference to the type-figure who "is not a Jew but is only acting the part," as opposed to one who has been baptized. 82 Josephus 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" (JW 2.18.2 [463]). These constituted "an equivocal element" which the Syrians regarded as alien, though evidently not as Jews. 83 Moreover, 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. This evidence shows beyond reasonable doubt that Judaism in the Roman Diaspora did win adherents who stopped short of circumcision. It does not, however, corroborate the description of this class that we find in the Paul)‫׳‬-Wissowa article of Kuhn-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 quit the pagan community. 84 We should like to know more of the manner in which the Jews of Antioch incorporated Greeks, or how far Philo identified the prosely toi who have joined the new and godly commonwealth and have equal rank with the native born (Spec. Leg. 1. 51-52) with the proselytes who have circumcised not their uncircumcision but their desires and pleasures (Quaest in Ex. 2.2). There was also a spectrum of opinion on the Jewish side, as we can see from the story of Izates and from the debate over allegorists in Alexandria. It has been said that the crucial question which confronted firstcentury Judaism was that posed by the Gentile world.85 This is 82 Arrian, Diss. 2.9.19-21. Note that the point of transition here is not circumcision but baptism. 83 Josephus also claims that the women of Damascus had with few exceptions become converts to the Jewish religion (JW 2.20.2 [560]). The hyperbole of this claim should cast some doubt on all Josephus' claims about the popularity of Jewish religion. 81 Contra Lifshitz, "Du Nouveau sur les 'Sympathisants,"'80. 85 W.D. Davies, "From Schweitzer to Scholem: Reflections on Sabbatai Svi," JBL 95(1976) 547.

probably true in the sense that the very survival of Judaism depended on working out a modus vivendi with the Gentile world. It is not true, however, that first-century Judaism was gready preoccupied with the salvation of the Gentiles. That was ultimately a matter for the eschatological age. In the meantime, the literature suggests a "selfconfident Judaism" in Kraabel's phrase. 86 There is relatively little evidence of active proselytizing (despite Matt 23:15).87 Jews were, however, both willing and able to attract Gentiles to their synagogues and Gentiles were eager to adopt Jewish customs. Diaspora Judaism seems to have accepted a wide range of Gentile behavior (from superficial interest to full conversion), and was not too greatly concerned to establish specific points at which one became eligible for salvation.88 Of course, the literary evidence may not give us the whole picture, but it suggests that full incorporation into the Jewish people was not generally considered essential for Gentiles to worship God in an adequate and acceptable way. I V . The Christian

debate on

circumcision

The people who came from Judea to Antioch according to Acts 15 represent the stricter end of the spectrum of Jewish opinion. The position of Paul, however, cannot be equated with that of even the most liberal Hellenistic Jews. No Hellenistic Jew actively discouraged circumcision. According to Acts 21, Paul was accused of teaching all the Jews among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or observe the customs. Whether this charge was justified is disputed. 89 Paul was primarily concerned with Gentiles. Moreover, he told the Corinthians that any one who is already circumcised should not seek to remove the marks of his circumcision (1 Cor 7:18). Whether the children subsequently should be circumcised is not clear. Yet even with regard to the Gentiles,

86

A.T. Kraabel, "Paganism and Judaism: T h e Sardis Evidence," in A. Benoit, M. Philonenko, et C. Vogel, ed., Paganisme, Judaïsme, Christianisme: Melanges offerts a Marcel Simon (Paris: de Boccard, 1978) 21. Compare Gager, The Origins of AntiSemitism, 99. 87 Only 8 of 731 inscriptions from Italy mention proselytes (Kuhn-Stegemann, "Proselyten,' 1264). 88 In his "Paul and the T o r a h , " in Anti-Semitism and the Foundations of Christianity (New York: Paulist, 1979) 58, L. Gaston claims that legalism arose as a Gentile problem because God-fearers not under the covenant had to establish their righteousness by performance of certain works. I know of no evidence which would support this view. ® e.g. Gaston, "Paul and the T o r a h , " 66; Gager, The Origins of Anti-Semitism, 211-12.

Paul goes much further than a Jew like the Ananias who converted Izates. While neither circumcision nor uncircumcision matters (and so might be expected to be optional), he tells his Gentile converts that if they have themselves circumcised, Christ will be of no advantage to them (Gal 5:2). The strength of his feelings on the subject is clear when he warns the Philippians against "the dogs...who mutilate the flesh" (Phil 3:2) or wishes that those who trouble the Galatians might mutilate themselves (Gal 5: 12). These statements are made in polemical heat, to be sure, but they are worthier of a Roman satirist than of a Hebrew born of Hebrews. Paul's vehement rejection of circumcision comes from the fact that he preached a new creation in which there was neither Jew nor Greek, circumcision nor uncircumcision (Gal 6: 15). This new creation had its own theological basis—faith in Christ—and its own social reality with its distinctive rituals of baptism and the Lord's supper. 90 Paul's converts are not said to join the synagogue, even as "God-fearers," but formed their own new assembly. Circumcision symbolized a different social reality and a different way to salvation, hence the decisive rejection. Despite recent claims to the contrary, 91 Paul's rejection of circumcision symbolized a rejection of the ultimate efficacy of the contemporary synagogue.92 He did not of course reject the heritage of Judaism or deny that the Jews were heirs to the promises, and he certainly continued to regard himself as a Jew. Yet those Jews who did not believe in Christ were not "in Christ," and that was what mattered. Paul's belief in the resurrection of Jesus and its eschatological implications distinguished him radically from Diaspora Jews such as Philo or Ananias. Prior to his conversion, he was probably at the stricter end of the spectrum in terms of the importance he attached to circumcision. 93 After his conversion he continued to attach greater importance to it than did many Jews of the Diaspora, but for largely negative reasons. It symbolized and facilitated the contrast between the new creation and the old. Diaspora Judaism, in general, had

90

E.P. Sanders, Paul, the Laiv and the Jewish People (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983) 176, with reference to 1 Corinthians. 91 Especially by Gaston and Gager. 92 E.P. Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977) 7: "In short, this is what Paul finds wrong with Judaism: it is not Christianity." While Paul would not have distinguished Judaism and Christianity in this way, Sanders' insight is essentially correct. 93 Gaston, "Paul and the Torah," 61, suggests that Paul was a Shammaitc, but specific correspondence is lacking. See Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism, 138 n.61.

sought to emphasize points of similarity to its gentile environment. Paul was concerned to emphasize the novelty, and therefore the "otherness" of the new creation. The implied devaluation of the Jewish way of life stirred greater passions than was ever the case with the allegorists of Alexandria, and made for a crucial and fateful difference from the Jews of the Diaspora who also, in their way, extended the hope of salvation to the Gentiles.

PART F O U R DEAD SEA SCROLLS

T H E O R I G I N O F T H E Q U M R A N COMMUNITY: A REVIEW O F T H E EVIDENCE

After five decades of study, the origin of the Qumran community is still the subject of widely diverse hypotheses.1 The reason is, of course, that the evidence of the scrolls is very elliptic on this subject. T h e imminent publication of 4 Q M M T , the supposed letter of the Teacher of Righteousness to the Wicked Priest, may cast some new light on the issue.2 For the present, however, it is worthwhile to review the available evidence and try to clarify how far the main current hypotheses can claim a textual basis. I will focus on three issues: (1) the causes of dissension between the Dead Sea sect and the rest of Judaism; (2) the time at which the sect emerged as a distinct organization; and (3) the opposition to the Teacher associated with the Man of Lies. 1. The Causes of Dissension The Damascus Document addresses the issues which distinguished the sect from the rest of Israel in three passages. In C D 3:12 we are told that "with those who held fast to the commandments of God, those who were left over of them, God established his covenant with Israel forever, to reveal to them the hidden things (nistārât) in which all Israel strayed: he manifested to them his holy sabbaths, his glorious feasts, the testimonies of his righteousness and the ways of his truth and the desires of his will which man must do and by which he must live." In this passage the "covenant with Israel" is restricted 1 For a sampling of recent proposals see B.Z. Wacholder, The Dawn of Qumran (Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College, 1983); P.R. Davies, The Damascus Covenant (Sheffield: J S O T , 1983); R. Eisenman, Maccabees, Zadokites, Christians and Qumran (Leiden: Brill, 1983); B.E. Thiering, Redating the Teacher of Righteousness (Sydney: Glenburn, 1979). N. Golb ("Who Hid the Dead Sea Scrolls?" BA [June, 1985] 6882) denies that Qumran was an Essene settlement but fails to account for the community described in 1QS or Pliny's reference to an Essene setdement between Jericho and Ain Gedi {Nat. Hist. 5.15). 2 E. Qimron and J . Strugnell, "An Unpublished Halakhic Letter from Qumran" in Biblical Archeology To-Day: Proceedings of the International Congress on Biblical Archeology (Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1985) 400-407. See now E. Qimron and J . Strugnell, Qumran Cave 4. IV. Miqsat Ma'ase Ha-Torah (DJD 10; Oxford: Clarendon, 1994).

to a remnant and requires a new revelation. 3 The content of that revelation is primarily the cultic calendar. Presumably the "desires of his will" include other matters besides, but the only matters mentioned specifically are the observance of sabbaths and feasts. The issues between the sect and the rest of Israel are elaborated in the discussion of the "three nets of Belial" in CD 4:15-5:12. These are fornication, riches, and profanation of the Temple. The author admits that other people see these practices as "three kinds of righteousness" They are seen as sinful only in light of the distinctive halakhah of the sect. The fornication in question consists of taking two wives in their lifetime (either polygamy or divorce). In support of the halakhah, Gen 1:27 and Deut 17:17 are cited. Neither passage carried this implication in its biblical context, but a similar prohibition is found in the Temple Scroll, in the "law of the king."4 Profanation of the temple is said to result from failure to observe purity laws—lying with a woman during her period, and marrying nieces. Here again CD extends the evident range of the biblical text (Lev 18:13), again in accordance with the Temple Scroll (66:16-17). This passage does not clarify the second net of Belial, "wealth" but it adds a further grievance against the enemies of the sect. They say the ordinances of the covenant are not sure. Rejection of the sectarian claim of revelation is construed as blasphemy. The third passage in CD which discusses the points of dissension between the sect and the rest of Judaism is in CD 6:11-7:6. Those who enter the covenant are forbidden to enter the Temple to light its altar in vain. While this need not imply a total boycott of the Temple, it surely involves a refusal to participate in the official Temple cult.5 Instead, they should "act according to the exact interpretation of the Law during the age of wickedness" This involves "separation from the sons of the pit" and avoidance of "the unclean riches of wickedness acquired by vow or anathema or from the temple treasure." This comment clarifies the second net of Belial in the earlier passage. The enemies of the sect are implicitly accused of robbing the poor of the people by exploitation of Temple offerings.6 3 L.H. Schiffman (The Halakha at Qumran [Leiden: Brill, 1975] 22-32) argues that the nistar is the sectarian interpretation of the Torah, through divinely inspired exegesis. 4 11QT 57:17-18. Wacholder (The Daun of Qumran, 119-24) argues that the "three nets of Belial" are derived from the Temple Scroll, which he regards as the Torah of Qumran. His case is strongest on the marriage laws. 5 See the discussion of this passage by Davics, The Damascus Covenant, 134-40; J. Murphy O'Connor, "The Damascus Document Revisited" RB 92 (1985) 234-38. 6 Compare IQpHab 12:6 where the Wicked Priest is said to have stolen the wealth of the poor ones.

Those who enter the covenant are further enjoined to observe the difference between sacred and profane and keep the sabbath and festivals "according to the findings of the members of the new covenant in the land of Damascus." This third passage in CD, then, recapitulates the points of dissent as envisaged by the document. These are the cultic calendar and Temple cult, certain purity laws and wealth that is considered unclean. A more direct and elaborate account of the issues separating the sect from the rest of Judaism is found in 4 Q M M T , which is characterized by the editors as "a polemic-halakhic letter,' ‫ י‬which was "probably written immediately after the separation of the sect.7‫יי‬ The original document must be pieced together from the surviving fragments, but it apparently contained (1) an opening formula, (2) a calendar, (3) a list of distinctive Qumran halakhot, and (4) an epilogue discussing the reasons for the sect's withdrawal. The prominence of the calendar is an obvious point of resemblance to CD. The specific halakhot described by Strugnell and Qimron do not correspond to those in C D but they share common concerns with ritual purity and marital status. Some topics are also concerned with tithes offered to the priests, an issue which may be related to the "unclean riches of wickedness" denounced in CD. Calendrical considerations are also prominent in 1QS. There we are told that those who enter the covenant must live "in accordance with all that has been revealed concerning their appointed times" (1:8), and are forbidden to "depart from any command of God concerning their times; they shall be neither early nor late for any of their appointed times (1:14-15). Elsewhere in 1QS we are told that the Council of the Community "shall be an agreeable offering, atoning for the land and determining the judgment of wickedness" (8:10, compare 5:6) and we might infer from this that the community did not rely on the official Temple cult. 1QS 8 goes on to say that none of the things hidden from Israel but discovered by the interpreter of the law should be concealed from those who have been confirmed for two years in the community. In 1QS, as in CD 3, the sectarian understanding of the covenant involves the new revelation of matters hidden from the rest of Israel. Thus far, the primary issue between the sect and the rest of Israel would seem to be the cultic calendar, although other matters of ritual purity also impinge on the status of the Temple and its cult. It 7 Qimron and Strugnell, "An Unpublished Halakhic Letter," 401. This judgment about the time of origin is not necessarily correct.

is worth noting, however, what issues are not mentioned in these documents. The most widely held explanation of the separation of the sect from the rest of Judaism is that it was triggered by the usurpation of the high priesthood by the Maccabees. This explanation is held not only by the classic consensus of Cross, Vermes, Milik, and others, 8 but also by scholars like Murphy-O'Connor, who hold that the sect had an earlier origin but that a quarrel over the high priesthood precipitated the move to Qumran. 9 The right of succession to the high priesthood is an issue of primary importance for those scholars who hold that the Teacher of Righteousness was the High Priest in Jerusalem and was ousted by Jonathan Maccabee. It is with some surprise, then, that we note that neither CD nor 1QS suggests that the legitimacy of the High Priest was an issue. Neither is it an issue in 4 Q M M T , although that document is apparently addressed to a leader of Israel. There is, however, another source of information about the origin of the Qumran community—the peshanm. These compositions are usually dated somewhat later than 1QS and C D — a b o u t the middle of the first century BCE This dating rests in part on the palaeography of the documents, of which only single exemplars have been found (i.e., there are no multiple copies of any pesher) and in part on the historical allusions in 4QpNahum, which transparently refer to Alexander Jannaeus (103-76 BCE) and events in the first half of the first century (compare also the pesher on Hosea). We cannot assume, however, that all the peshanm were composed at the same time or that the extant documents are autographs. 10 The pesher on Habakkuk could, in principle, be older than that on Nahum. Even if it is not, its evidence should not be slighted, since it may preserve old traditions of the community. The passages that concern us in the peshanm are those related to the Teacher of Righteousness and the Wicked Priest. Like most scholars, I hold that the Wicked Priest should be identified as Jonathan Maccabee. The clearest allusions are those to the death of the Wicked Priest in 4QpPs a 4:8-10 and 1QpHab 9:8-12, which say that God gave him into the hands of his enemies (1QpHab), who are 8

F.M. Cross, The Ancient Library of Qtimran (Garden City, NY: Doublcday, 1961) 109-60; G. Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls: (Qumran in Perspective (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981) 151; J . T . Milik, Ten Tears of Discovery in the Wilderness of Judaea (London: SCM, 1959) 80-83; H. Stegemann, Die Entstehung der Qumrangemeinde (Bonn: published privately, 1971) 204-26. ‫י‬ J . Murphy-O'Connor, "The Esscncs and their History," RB 81 (1974) 22930. 10 See M.P. Horgan, Pesharim: Qumran Interpretations of Biblical Books (Washington: CBA, 1979) 3-4.

specified in 4QpPs a as "the ruthless ones of the Gentiles." Most scholars agree that this can only refer to the death ofJonathan at the hand of Trypho (1 Macc 12:39-53; 13:23)." It must be said, however, that other allusions do not seem especially apt for Jonathan, and the passage which says that he "walked in the ways of drunkenness" (1 Q p H a b 11:13-14) is more easily applied to either Simon 12 or Alexander Jannaeus. 13 It is certainly possible that the title is applied to more than one individual. The attempt of van der Woude to assign each reference in the Habakkuk commentary to a different individual is unconvincing, 14 but the possibility that more than one High Priest is involved cannot be dismissed. The fact that the reference is to High Priests is assured by the wordplay rF (Wicked)/r's (Head). Two passages in the pesharim bear directly on the causes of the rift between the Teacher and his followers and the High Priesthood. The first is in 1 Q p H a b 8:9-13, where Hab 2:5-6 is interpreted with reference to the Wicked Priest, who was called by the true name at the beginning of his course, but when he ruled in Israel, he became arrogant, abandoned God, and betrayed the statutes for the sake of wealth. He stole and amassed the wealth of the men of violence who had rebelled against God and he took the wealth of peoples to add to himself guilty sin. And the abominable ways he pursued with every sort of unclean impurity. 15

The interpretation of this passage has been much debated. T o be "called by the name of truth" has been taken to mean either that his name had honorable associations (e.g., for Jonathan, the son of Saul; for Simon, Simon the Just) 16 or that he was a legitimate priest,17 or

11

G. Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls, 151; A.S. van der Woude, "Wicked Priest or Wicked Priests? Reflecdons on the Identification of the Wicked Priest in the Habakkuk Commentary," j3‫׳‬S 33 (1982) 356. 12 So Cross, The Ancient Library, 152. Cross's identification of the Wicked Priest as Simon rests largely on a passage in the Testimonia, which refers not to the Wicked Priest but to "a cursed man, one of Belial." 13 Van der Woude, "Wicked Priest or Wicked Priests?" 358; W. H. Brownlee, "The Wicked Priest, the Man of Lies, and the Righteous Teacher,"JQÄ 73 (1982) 5. According tojosephus, Alexander Jannaeus became ill from overdrinking at the end of his life (Ant. 13.15.5 [398]). 14 Some of the allusions provide no basis for a specific identification. The proposal that the first wicked priest was Judas Maccabee is very dubious since it relies on a confused passage in Josephus which says that Judas was High Priest after Alcimus (Ant 12.11.2 [434]). Brownlee, "The Wicked Priest," also favors multiple "Wicked Priests." 15 Trans. Horgan, Pesharim, 17. 16 Cross, The Ancient Library, 142. 17 Horgan, Pesharim, 4 L

simply that he had a good reputation. 18 The phrase translated "at the beginning of his course" (b'tehillat emdw) is often rendered "when he first arose.5'19 Milik contends that "ramad is a general term which refers to the performance of any office, political, religious or eschatological." 20 We must note, however, that it is often used for priestly service, and, since the antecedent here is "priest," the reference is most naturally to the priestly office.21 The verb mašal is rightly taken to indicate civil authority but not kingship, and therefore to be appropriate for the early Hasmoneans. 22 Many scholars have argued that the passage refers to the two stages of Jonathan's rise to power: he became "ruler and leader" after the death of Judas (1 Macc 9:30) but was appointed high priest by the Syrian king Alexander Balas in 152 BCE (1 Macc 10:20). This assumption of the High Priesthood is the reason most widely posited for the rift between the Qumran sect and the Jerusalem priesthood. Hans Burgmann finds an allusion to the usurpation of the priesthood in the text of Habakkuk cited here, "woe to him who multiplies what is not his own," but the pesher conspicuously fails to make this association.23 Instead "what is not his own" is interpreted as "the wealth of the men of violence" and "the wealth of the peoples." Stegemann claims that hakkāhēn hārāša' must be translated "the illegitimate priest" and that priestly illegitimacy can only result from cultic abuses or from the wrong ancestry.24 He finds the cultic charges against the Wicked Priest too general and concludes that his ancestry must have been the issue, although he admits that this is never stated in the scrolls.25 The assertion that "wicked" here means "illegitimate" is not necessarily compelling, however—there are no parallels to establish the usage. Moreover, both Stegemann and Burgmann, and indeed most scholars who have addressed this question, base their argument on deductive rather than inductive reasoning: they assume that the usurpation of the High Priesthood must have been the reason why Jonathan was designated "Wicked ‫ "י‬G. Jeremias, Der Lehrer der Gerechtigkeit (Göttingen: Vandcnhoeck & Ruprecht, 1963) 36-40; G.W.E. Nickclsburg, "Simon —A‫ ׳‬Priest with a Reputation for Faithfulness," BASOR 223 (1976) 67-68. 19 See G. Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls in English (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1968) 240. 20 Milik, Ten Years, 65. 21 Horgan, Pesharim, 41. Compare the use of ma'amad for priestly service, 1 Q M 2:3, Mishnah Ta'anit 4:2, Y. Yadin, The Scroll of the War of the Sons of Light Against the Sons of Darkness (Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1962) 202-7. 22 Milik, Ten Tears, 65-66. 23 H. Burgmann, %uxi lösbare Qtimranprobltme (Frankfurt: Lang, 1986) 75 24 Stegemann, Die Entstehung, 110-1 1. 25 Ibid., 111. Compare Milik, Ten Years, 83.

Priest." However plausible this deduction may seem, we must recognize that it is never supported by the explicit statements of the texts, although 1QpHab 8:9-13 provided a golden opportunity for making the charge. 26 Moreover, this passage in the pesher can plausibly be construed to exclude this reason for the rift. We have noted already that W is often used for specifically priestly service. If it carries this connotation here, the Wicked Priest enjoyed a good reputation at the beginning of his service as High Priest. This is not conceivable if he was thought to be illegitimate because of descent or, parenthetically, if he had ousted the Teacher of Righteousness from the office. In any case, the charges against him here concern usurpation of wealth and cultic impurity. The accusation of illgotten wealth is also made against "the last priests of Jerusalem" in 1QpHab 9:4, while the Wicked Priest is said to defile God's sanctuary in 12:9. We have seen that these offenses also figured prominendy in CD. The second crucial passage is found in 1QpHab 11:4-8. There we are told that the Wicked Priest pursued the Teacher to his place of exile and attempted to disrupt his celebration of the Day of Atonement. This passage conveys two important pieces of information. First, the Teacher was observing a different cultic calendar than the High Priest (who otherwise would have been officiating in Jerusalem). In light of the prominence of the calendar as an issue in CD, this is not surprising. In view of this fact, however, it is surely unlikely that the Teacher had recently been officiating as High Priest in the Jerusalem Temple. There is no evidence that Jonathan, or any of the Hasmoneans, introduced a new calendar, and the Teacher can scarcely have switched calendars when he went to Qumran. The second piece of information in 1QpHab 11 is that the High Priest took the initiative in attempting to suppress the sect. This is confirmed by other passages. 1QpHab 9:9 speaks of the wrong done to the Teacher and his followers. 1QpHab 12:6 says that the Wicked Priest plotted to destroy completely the poor ones, and 12:10 adds that he stole their wealth. A fragmentary passage in 4QpPsa 4:8-10 has been reconstructed to say that the Wicked Priest tried to kill the Teacher. A much-quoted passage from a supposed Teacher-hymn in the Hodayot says that the author was driven out "like a bird from his nest" (1QH 4:8-9). We should not then suppose that the secession of the Teacher and his followers was a unilateral decision. At least some of the initiative lay with the "wicked" High Priest.

26

Brownlee, "The Wicked Priest," 17.

One further piece of evidence from the peshanm has potential significance for the feud between the Teacher and the Wicked Priest. Both the Teacher of Righteousness (in 1QpHab 2:8; 4QpPsa 2:19; 3:15) and the Wicked Priest (in 1QpHab 8:16; 9:16; 11:12) are referred to as "the priest." Hartmut Stegemann has insisted that this title is a technical term and that it proves that both of these figures were High Priests.27 The argument has recently been formulated succinctly by Murphy-O'Connor: The available evidence reveals that hakēhēn is always used in a 'titular' or 'non-titular' sense. In the latter the meaning is 'the aforementioned priest.' However, in the Scrolls the sense is always 'titular' and elsewhere this absolute usage always designated the High Priest... 2 "

Hence the conclusion that the Teacher must have been an otherwise unknown High Priest who officiated in the Jerusalem Temple during the so-called Intersacerdotiuiri29 and was displaced by the "Illegitimate Priest," Jonathan. The bold assertions of Stegemann and Murphy-O'Connor are not sustained by the evidence, even as that evidence is presented by Stegemann. 30 Many instances of the titular usage refer to the priest of a specific shrine in the preexilic period, but this fact does not invalidate Stegemann's claim for the postexilic usage. He acknowledges a problem in the case of Ezekiel, who is identified as "the priest" in Ezek 1:3. He claims, however, that "the priest" is used absolutely to refer to "the Aaronid High Priest" in the following cases: Ezra (Ezra 7:11; 10:10, 16; Neh 8:2, 9; 12:26), Meremoth (Ezra 8:33), Eliashib (Neh 13:4), Shelemaiah. (Neh 13:13), and Simon (Sir 50:1). Only two of these five priests (Eliashib and Simon) are generally recognized to have been High Priests. It has indeed been suggested that Ezra came to Jerusalem as High Priest,31 but this suggestion lacks direct evidence and is open to the objection that Ezra is not listed in the line of high priests in Nehemiah 12.32 27 Stegemann, Die Enstehung, 102 nn. 328 and 329. He further claims that the title cannot be used merely for a claim to High Priesthood but only for one who actually held the office. 28 Murphy-O'Connor, "The Damascus Document Revisited," RB 92 (1985) 239. 29 Josephus, Ant. 20.10.4 [357] says the office was vacant for seven years (between Alcimus and Jonathan). Elsewhere he says that Judas Maccabec had functioned as High Priest and that the interval was only four years. 30 Stegemann,' Die Entstehung, A 79-82 n. 328. 31 K. Koch, "Ezra and the'Origins of Judaism,'"JSS 19 (1974) 190-93. 32 H.G.M. Williamson, Ezra, Nehemiah (Word Bible Commentary 16; Waco: Word, 1985) 91. Williamson judges Koch's suggestion "most improbable." Similarly D.J. Clines (Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther [The New Century Bible Comment-

Moreover, on his arrival in Jerusalem he is said to have delivered gold, silver, and vessels to Meremoth son of Uriah, the priest (Ezra 8:33). It is difficult to see how "the priest" can designate "High Priest" simultaneously in the case of both Ezra and Meremoth. The argument that the absolute titular use of "the priest" must designate high priest is unfounded. There is no basis, then, for a sharp distinction between the usage in the pesharim and such usage as we find in C D 14:7 which refers to "the priest who is appointed at the head of the many. , ‫ י‬All we can infer is that the Teacher was regarded as the priest par excellence by his own followers. T h e expression "the priest" obviously could mean the High Priest, and probably does so in the case of the "Wicked Priest,5' but it is not in itself evidence that the Teacher of Righteousness ever functioned as High Priest in Jerusalem. Since the scrolls never assert either that he had so functioned or that his opponent had usurped the High Priesthood, and in view of the calendrical difference between the Essenes and the Jerusalem Temple, the theory that the Teacher was a displaced High Priest must be judged highly improbable. 33 The primary reason why scholars have thought that the usurpation of the High Priesthood was a factor in the secession of the Qumran sect is that it seems (to modern scholars) to be the development in the early Hasmonean period which was most likely to cause such a split. O u r examination of the evidence, however, fails to confirm this hypothesis. The theory is not thereby rendered impossible, but we must ask whether it is necessary. The scrolls provide adequate reasons for the rejection of the Jerusalem cult: the difference in calendar, halakhic matters concerning purity and marriage, and the ill-gotten wealth of the ruling priests. The break may have been precipitated by the Teacher's criticism of the High Priest or by the attempt on the part of the authorities to suppress the variant calendar. It may be that the Teacher and his followers had been able to observe their own cultic calendar during the Intersacerdotium, 34 but that when Jonathan became High Priest he ary; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984] 99) asserts that Ezra "was not high priest, but simply a member of the high-priestly family." For a reconstruction of the High-Priestly lineage in the Persian period, see F.M. Cross, "A Reconstruction of the J u d e a n Restoration," JBL 94 (1975) 17. T h e list does not include Ezra, Meremoth, or Shelemaiah. 33 See also H. Burgmann, "Das umstrittene intersacerdotium in Jerusalem 159152 v. Chr.," JSJ 11 (1980) 135-76. 34 This does not require that the Teacher or another Essene leader was de facto High Priest. At most the Teacher would have functioned as High Priest for his own group, but we do not know whether in fact they performed ceremonies which required a High Priest (e.g., on the Day of Atonement).

insisted on uniformity. This suggestion too is hypothetical, but it requires us to make fewer assumptions beyond the actual evidence than does the customary view about a dispute over the priesthood. 2. The Time of the Emergence of the Sect Even if the secession of the Qumran community was not a reaction to the usurpation of the High Priesthood, the origin of the settlement by the Dead Sea is dated to the early Hasmonean period on archaeological grounds. Moreover, if the original Wicked Priest was Jonathan Maccabee, the activity of the Teacher of Righteousness must be dated to his time. The main debate has been whether the Essenes had already been in existence as an orgarnized group before this time and for how long. As usual, the lack of consensus reflects the paucity of the evidence. T o begin with, there is some ambiguity as to what is meant by the emergence of the sect. It is important to distinguish between the traditions of a group, however distinctive, and a sectarian form of organization. Despite the claim in CD 3 that the distinctive requirements of the "new covenant" were revealed, most scholars have assumed that they were derived from older traditions. It is certainly true that the 364-day calendar is found in documents which were not demonstrably composed by Essenes (the Astronomical Book of Enoch and Jubilees). This was presumably a tradition shared with other Jewish groups and one which was quite probably older than any organization of Essenes. The books of Enoch reflect a tradition which goes back at least to the middle of the third century, but provides no evidence as to how the tradents were organized. The Enoch tradition is part of the religious legacy inherited by the Qumran community, but it is not itself evidence for preQumran Essenes since it lacks the distinctive organization of the sect.35 Similarly, arguments that some Essene traditions (interest in divination and astrology, Iranian themes) can be traced to a Babylonian setting cannot be taken as evidence that the organization of the Essene sect should be localized there. 36 The Damascus Document describes the emergence of the sect in three places. Column 1 is the only passage which gives indications of dates. As the text now stands we are told that God "visited" the 35

See further J.J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination (New York: Crossroad, 1984) 56-63. 36 J . M u r p h y - O ' C o n n o r , "The Essenes and Their History," RB 81 (1974) 222-26; "The Damascus Document Revisited," RB 92 (1985) 228-29. It is not apparent to me that any of the points listed requires a Babylonian setting.

remnant of Israel "in the age of wrath, three hundred and ninety years after he had given them into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar" and caused "a root of cultivation" to spring from Israel and Aaron. 37 Yet we are told that these were like blind men for twenty years until the coming of the Teacher of Righteousness. In this passage, then, there is a clear distinction between two stages in the emergence of the community, although they are not far apart. The emergence of the "root of cultivation" here has often been correlated with other groups of the postexilic period, who are mentioned in apocalyptic literature, most notably "the chosen righteous from the eternal plant of righteousness" in the Apocalypse of Weeks (1 Enoch 93:10). T h e other passages in CD, however, suggest a more distinct form of organization than can be inferred from the apocalypses. In C D 3:13 we read that God established his covenant with Israel by revealing the hidden things. Yet the recipients of this revelation were still defiling themselves until God pardoned them and built them a sure house. Finally in C D 6 we are told that God remembered the covenant of the forefathers and raised from Aaron men of understanding and from Israel men of wisdom. In this case there is no reference to a further period of error, but a figure called the Searcher of the Law is said to set up ordinances for the whole period of wickedness.38 This figure is usually identified as the Teacher of Righteousness. 39 The passage goes on to speak of a covenant which involved a rejection of the Temple cult. T h e passages in cols. 3 and 6 do not distinguish as clearly as does col. 1 between two stages: the initial formation of the group and the advent of the Teacher. Col. 3 is most easily understood to say that the initial stage involved a covenant, while a second involved the "sure house." In col. 6 the elect from Aaron and Israel must be correlated with the first stage in col. 1. The covenantal agreement not to use the Temple "in vain" is mentioned after the "Searcher of the Law" and could be one of his ordinances, but the passage sees no discontinuity between this figure and the initial men of Aaron and Israel. It seems likely, then, though not certain, that the formation of the "new covenant" which was the hallmark of the Qumran sect preceded the advent of the Teacher by a short period 37

This is the standard interpretation of the passage, exemplified in the translation of Vermes. 38 T h e Searcher of the Law is identified as the "staff" of Num 21:18 (mehāqēq) while the statutes are m'hôq'qôt. 39 Davies (The Damascus Covenant, 123-25) identifies him with an earlier leader, before the rise of the "Teacher of Righteousness" but this is to multiply figures without cause. See my discussion in The Apocalyptic Imagination, 125-26.

(the 20 years of col. 1), although he may have finalized the ordinances and completed the separation from the rest of Judaism. 40 As we have noted, the only explicit indications of date in C D are the figures "390 years" and "20 years'' in col. 1. These figures are controversial for two reasons. On the one hand, they disrupt the rhythmical balance of the parallel lines and are quite probably glosses. On the other hand, the precise meaning of the passage is open to question. T o say that the numbers are added as glosses, however, does not give us license to disregard them. They are evidently ancient glosses and reflect the sect's own calculation of its origin.41 T h e interpretation of the passage presents the more serious problem. The figure 390 is derived from Ezek 4:5, where it refers to the punishment of the house of Israel.42 This is a schematic figure, however, and cannot be taken as chronologically exact, as we can see by comparison with Daniel 9, where the period from the destruction of the Temple to the Maccabean era is calculated as 490 years. 43 At most we can assume that such figures as 390 years and 490 years could only be plausible several hundred years after the exile and so point to a date in the Hellenistic era. Moreover, there are problems with the standard translation of C D 1. T h e verb pāqad, "visit," which is usually taken in a benign sense here, is used elsewhere in CD in the sense of "punish." 44 The expression Itytw ,wtm is usually translated here as "after he had given them," which is an unusual construal of the preposition. 45 The He40 In I Q S 8 the motifs of "planting" and "Aaron and Israel," which arc used of the first stage in CD I and the "house" (stage 2 in C D 3) arc all used with reference to the group which "prepares in the desert the way of the Lord" (possibly the pioneering settlers at Qumran). The fusion of terminology here again suggests that the cmcrgcnce of the sect was remembered as a continuous process. 41 It has been suggested that if we add the 390 years and 20 years of blindness, allow the biblical figure of 40 years for the carcer of the Teacher, and add the 40 years from his death to the destruction of his enemies (CD 20:15), we arrive at 490 years, the 70 weeks of years of Daniel 9 (F.F. Bruce, "The Book of Daniel and the Qumran Community," Neotestamentica et Semitica [cd. E.E. Ellis and M. Wilcox; Edinburgh: Clark, 1969] 232; G. Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls. 147-48). If this suggestion is correct, it would point to a date for the end of the age a century after the first emergence of the sect. The chronological data in CD would then presumably have been inserted within that century and before the pesher on Habakkuk, which discusses the delay of the end. was composed. 42 Vermes (The Dead Sea Scrolls, 158) says that we may "safely discard" this derivation since the document shows no interest in the fate of northern Israel. This is to lose sight of the symbolic understanding of scripture in the scrolls, where the original rcfercncc is often disregarded. 43 Vermes (The Dead Sea Scrolls, 158-59) gives several illustrations of the unreliability of the chronology of ancient Jewish writers. 44 C D 5:15; 7:9; 8:2, 3. 45 See Davies, The Damascus Covenant, 65.

brew could be construed differently, by taking the 390 years as equivalent to "the epoch of wrath" and Itytw Jwtm as indicating the manner of punishment (to give them, or by giving them, into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar). On this interpretation the 390 years do not necessarily indicate the time of the emergence of the sect, but only identify the "age of wrath" with the period prophesied by Ezekiel. Even if we disallow any chronological value to the 390 years, however, C D 1 contains valuable information in the statement that those in the elect group were like blind men for twenty years, presumably a round figure for half a generation. This blindness is relieved by the advent of the Teacher of Righteousness.46 If the Teacher was a contemporary of Jonathan Maccabee, as most scholars infer from the pesharim, then the "plant root" can scarcely be dated earlier than 172 BCE While this information is neither as clear nor as exact as we would wish, it does reflect the community's own recollection of its history. T o overrule this evidence, we would need to find passages in the scrolls which require (and not merely permit) a different calculation. Jerome Murphy-O'Connor and Philip Davies claim to find such evidence in CD. Their reconstruction of Essene origins is "based on the conviction that CD unambiguously pointed to the Exile in Babylon as the time and place of the origin of the Essene movement." 47 This conviction has been subjected to a thorough and careful critique by Michael Knibb, 48 and there is no need to repeat all the arguments here. I will focus only on what seems to me to be the central issue, especially since Murphy-O'Connor has attempted a rebuttal of Knibb on this point. 49 The central issue is the interpretation of the three passages in CD 1, 3, and 6 which recount the emergence of the sect. In cols. 3 and 6 the rise of the new group follows direcdy on a reference to the exile. This would also be true in col. 1 if the chronological data were excised. Knibb explains the abrupt transition by reference to

46 Ibid., 175, 200. Davies regards the reference to the Teacher in 1:11 as secondary, but he is led to this conclusion by his reconstruction of the history of the sect and of CD, not by any textual evidence. 47 Murphy-O'Connor, "The Damascus Document Revisited," 226. 48 M. Knibb, "Exile in the Damascus Document," JSOT 25 (1983) 99-117. 49 "The Damascus Document Revisited," 227-28. Murphy-O'Connor makes a major concession to his critics when he accepts the translation "converts of Israel" (rather than returnees) for sby yisra'el (ibid., 233), although he makes an exception for CD 19:33-34.

the same theological pattern that we find in other literature of the period, namely that which sees the condition of exile as lasting beyond the return at the end of the sixth century and being brought to an end only in the events of a much later period. 50

This pattern is exemplified in Daniel 9 and 1 Enoch 93. MurphyO'Connor counters that this pattern is not found in any of the source documents of CD (from which he excludes col. 1). In the apocalypses the exile is followed by a period of lawlessness, which comes to an end in the writer's generation, when, in 1 Enoch 93, a new group emerges. In CD, there is no interval of lawlessness.51 Murphy-O'Connor has correctly perceived that the understanding of history in CD is different from that of the apocalypses. In the apocalypses, the rise of a movement heralds the end of an era. CD emphasizes that Belial is let loose upon Israel during the time of the existence of the sect. The different emphasis here may well derive from the dualistic world view which is expounded in 1QS and only hinted at in CD. 52 It does not follow, however, that the sect must have arisen during the exile or at the start of the postexilic period. C D 5:17-21 moves directly from "ancient times" when Moses and Aaron arose to "the epoch of the desolation of the land." We do not infer that the author placed the desolation in the premonarchic period 53 . Knibb's argument does not require complete correspondence between the theological patterns of CD and the apocalypses. The significant parallel is that the condition of exile persists beyond the sixth century. 54 Therefore, a passage like CD 3, which mentions no intervening events between the exile and the rise of the sect, does not necessarily date the latter event to the sixth century. 55 The evidence of CD (apart from col. 1) is compatible with an exilic date but does not require it. It cannot then overrule the explicit evidence of col. 1 for a later date. 50

Knibb, "Exile in the Damascus Document," 110. "The Damascus Document Revisited," 227. 52 On the dualism of CD sec my essay "Was the Dead Sea Sect an Apocalyptic Movement?" in this volume. 53 T h e authenticity of the reference to Moses and Aaron here has been questioned by J . Murphy-O'Connor ("An Essene Missionary Document? CD 11, 14-VI, 1," RR 77 [1970] 224) but is accepted by Davies [The Damascus Covenant, 121). In either case the extant text shows that contiguous references do not necessarily imply immediate historical continuity. 51 The closcst parallel to CD is neither I Enoch 93 nor Daniel but Jub 1:13-15, which says that when God scatters Israel they will forget the laws, and specifically the calendar (compare CD 3:13-15). 55 Davies (The Damascus Covenant, 202) grants that an "exilic origin" docs not necessarily imply a sixth century BCE date, but then it is difficult to see what is the chronological value of an exilic origin. 51

I conclude then that the two stages of the emergence of the sect, the "plant root 5 ' and the advent of the Teacher, must be dated in close proximity to each other, most probably in the second century. Nothing requires an earlier date for an organized community or for a "new covenant," although various traditions of the sect can undoubtedly be traced to a much earlier time. 3. The Man of the Lie A third area of dispute in the area of Qumran origins concerns the figure of the "Man of the Lie," also known as the Scoffer and the Spouter of Lies.56 Some scholars still assume that this figure is identical with the Wicked Priest, but G.Jeremias and H. Stegemann have made a strong case for his separate identity.57 Whereas the Wicked Priest is said to "rule in Israel" (1QpHab 8:9-10), the Liar is the leader of a group which rejected the authority of the Teacher. Both are enemies of the Teacher, but only the Wicked Priest is accused of defiling the sanctuary (1QpHab 12:8-9). The feud with the Man of the Lie concerns the true teaching:58 he is said to have led Israel astray and caused them not to listen to the Teacher (CD 1:15; 4QpPs37 1:25). Various hypotheses have been advanced about the identity of this figure and his relation to the Teacher. Hans Burgmann identifies him with Simon Maccabee, brother of the Wicked Priest Jonathan, and credits him with founding the Pharisaic sect.59 For Stegemann, he was a Hasidic leader who refused to accept the authority of the Teacher and led a break-away group which became the Pharisees.60 Murphy-O'Connor, in contrast, sees the "Man of the Lie" as the 56 This figure appears in CD 1:14; 8:13; 19:26; 20:15 (compare also CD 4:19 which refers to "Precept," a "spouter"). IQpHab 2: If.; 5:9-12; 10:1-13; 4QPss 3 1:26; 4:14. The text of 1QpMic 10:2 has been reconstructed to yield another reference, but this suggestion should be rejected (Horgan, Pesharim, 60). 57 G. Jeremias, Der Lehrer der Gerechtigkeit (SUNT 2; Göttingen: Vandenhocck & Ruprecht, 1963) 79-126; H. Stegemann, Die Entstehung, 41-53. Stegemann corrects some ofjeremias's arguments but confirms his main thesis. 58 The designation "Man of the Lie" may have overtones of Persian dualism. In Yasna 30 the evil spirit is "he who was of the Lie," and his followers are "the followers of the Lie" (See P.J. Kobelski, Melchizedek and Melchiresa; [CBQMS 10; Washington: CBA, 1981] 89). 59 H. Burgmann, 2jw1 lösbare Qumranprobleme, 13-256. 60 Stegemann, Die Entstehung, 227-28. The statement of Murphy-O'Connor that Stegemann regards the "Man of the Lie" as "a leader in the Essene movement" is not quite accurate, since Stegemann, quite correctly, refrains from using the name Essene at this stage of the development of the sect (J. Murphy-O'Connor, "The Judean Desert," in Early Judaism and its Modem Interpreters [ed. R.A. Kraft and G.W.E. Nickelsburg; Adanta: Scholars Press, 1986] 141).

leader of "non-Qumran Essenism" which refused to follow the Teacher to the desert,61 and has even suggested that he be identified with Judah the Essene.62 Recent discussion of the "Man of the Lie" has been heavily influenced by the work ofJeremias and Stegemann. Jeremias argued that the Man of the Lie and the Teacher were originally members of the same community. 63 Stegemann modified this argument and argued that the Man of the Lie was originally leader of his own community and that the Teacher may originally have belonged to it.64 Both scholars relied primarily on 1QpHab 5:8-12, where Hab 1:13b is interpreted as follows: The interpretation of it concerns the House of Absalom and their artisans, who were silent at the rebuke of the Teacher of jghteousness and did not support him against the Man of the Lie— who rejected the Law in the midst of all their council.

g

There are three notorious problems in this passage: the identity of the House of Absalom, the antecedent of "their council" and the question whether the Teacher was administering or suffering the rebuke. Stegemann is surely right that the "House of Absalom" is, syntactically, the most natural antecedent of "their council." 65 He proceeds to argue that the silence of the "House of Absalom" was understood to indicate support for the Man of the Lie and must therefore have been his community. This argument is not persuasive. The pesher reflects disappointment that the House of Absalom failed to help the Teacher, and help could scarcely have been expected from the community of the Man of the Lie. Moreover, if the House of Absalom had actually taken the side of the Man of the Lie, it would surely have been accused of something more than silence. The simplest interpretation of the passage is that the "house of Absalom" was, and remained, neutral ground. Its identity remains uncertain, but it is noteworthy that 1 Maccabees identifies two supporters of Jonathan Maccabee as "sons of Absalom." 66 It is possible that the "house of Absalom,' 1 was the actual name of a clan and that the symbolic associations of the name were fortuitous. 61

J , Murphy-O'Connor, "The Essence and their History," RB 81 (1974) 235. J . Murphy-O'Connor, "Judah the Essene and the Teacher of Righteousness," / M 2 . 1 0 (1981) 579-86. 6, Jeremias, Der Lehrer, 86-87. 61 Stegemann, Die Entstehung, 48-52. 65 Stegemann (Die Entstehung, 49) against Jeremias (Der Lehrer, 86), who takes it as the congregation of the Tcacher and the Man of the Lie. 66 I Macc 11 :70; 13: 11; D.N. Freedman, "The 'House of Absalom' in the Habakkuk Scroll," BASOR 114 (1949) 11-12. 63

The reference to "the rebuke of the Teacher of Righteousness" is ambiguous. Jeremias correctly established that the word in question [twkht) means rebuke, as in 1QS 6:1; C D 7:2; 9:2-8,67 not physical punishment as in Burgmann , s theory. 68 He proceeds to argue from 1QS 9:16-18 that such remonstrance would only have taken place between two members of the same community. 69 This point is not well founded: it is not apparent that the directive of 1QS 9 was already in force when this encounter took place. We have a possible clue as to the nature of the rebuke in 1 Q p H a b 5:11-12. We are told that the Man of the Lie rejected the Torah in the midst of the assembly. If the Teacher was rebuking the Man of the Lie, the rebuke was probably in accordance with this Torah. We may compare 4QpPs a 4:8-9, which says that "the Wicked Priest sought to murder the Teacher...and the law which he sent to him." From this it would seem that the Teacher made an attempt to win over his enemies by presenting them with a Torah (perhaps analogous to 4 Q M M T , the so-called "Letter of the Teacher of Righteousness to the Wicked Priest"). The effort was evidently unsuccessful, and the experience of rejection may have led him to formulate the rule of 1QS 9:16-18. On the other hand, if the Man of the Lie was administering the rebuke, this would presumably be related to his rejection of the law and of the divine authority of the Teacher. The use of twkht in IQpHab 5:4 would seem to favor an active rather than a passive use and so that the Teacher was the one administering the rebuke. Other evidence strengthens the impression that the feud was not an inner sectarian one. In C D 1:14 the man of mockery is said to spout waters of falsehood "to Israel" and lead them astray. He did not merely resist the claims of the Teacher but actively preached a different message. His audience was not just a congregation or community, but Israel. In C D 4:19-20 the "builders of the wall" who have followed the spouter are said to be trapped in two of the nets of Belial, in which he traps Israel. T h e disagreement then is not only over the authority of the Teacher but involves some of the halakhic issues which separated the sect from the rest of Israel. It is probable that those whom the Man of the Lie "led astray" included some who had hitherto been followers of the Teacher. CD 20:14-15 speaks of "the men of war who turned back with the Man of the Lie."70 The 67

Note also the use of the term in 1 QpHab 5:4 where twkht convicts the wicked ones of the people. 68 ζμιή lösbare Qumranprobleme, 84. 69 Jeremias, Der Lehrer, 85-86. 70 The designation "men of war" is derived from Deut 2:14.

same column says that those who rejected the "new covenant in the land of Damascus" would receive the same judgment as their companions who turned back with the men of scoffing. These traitors to the new covenant should not, however, be simply identified with the followers of the Scoffer. Indeed 1QpHab 2:1-10 distinguishes three groups of traitors: the "traitors together with the Man of the Lie" (2:1-2) who did not accept the words of the Teacher; the traitors to the new covenant, who were unfaithful to it; and the traitors at the end of days.71 Here again there seems to be a distinction between those who followed the Man of the Lie instead of the Teacher and those who were members of the new covenant. 72 The peshanm emphasize the success of the Man of the Lie.73 He led many astray (4QpPs 3 1:26; 1QpHab 10:9) and built a city of vanity and established a congregation with deceit (1QpHab 10:10).74 From this it would seem that he was credited with building up a movement, not merely retaining the loyalty of an old movement against the challenge of the Teacher, and not merely with causing a split within a sect. Murphy-O'Connor's view that the Man of the Lie and his followers represent "non-Qumran Essenism" 75 is implausible on several counts. T o begin with, we have found no evidence that the Liar was ever an "Essene." Further, there is no evidence that the "Qumran Essenes" were ever at variance with other settlements of the sect.76 Finally, there is evidence that the reverse was true. The Damascus Document, which clearly comes from a community loyal

71

For discussion of this passage see Jeremias, Der Lehrer, 79-82. He concludcs that there were three distinct groups, but not ncccssarily at three distinct times. 72 C D 1:17 says the Scoffer caused "the curses of his covenant" to cling to those he led astray. This is usually understood as God's covenant. If it were the Scoffcr's covenant it would indicate that he had a distinct covenant which was "his." 73 Stegemann, Die Entstehung, 44-45. 74 This passage might be thought to lend support to Burgmann's identification of the Liar witn Simon (Zwei lösbare Qumranprobleme, 175-83). Cross described Simon as "the builder par exccllcncc" (The Ancient Library of Qumran. 150; sec I Macc 13:10, 33, 52; 14:33, 37) and identified him with the cursed "man who rebuilds this city" in the Testimonia. Jeremias, however, has pointed out that in IQpHab the reference to building a city is derived from the biblical text. The pesher reinterprets it as building a congrégation. The passage does not necessarily have the same reference as the one in the Testimonia. 75 "The Essence and their History," 235. 76 Sec further my comments in "Was the Dead Sea Sect an Apocalyptic Community?" Philo and Josephus speak of one sect with many setdements. They do not, of course, mention Qumran. Qumran is identified as an Essene community primarily bccausc of Pliny's reference to an Essene settlement by the Dead Sea (Nat. Hist. 5.15) and the correspondences between the Community Rule and the account in Josephus.

to the Teacher, legislates for "those who live in camps following the order of the land" (7:6-9),77 and therefore provides for "nonQumran Essenes5' within the Teacher's movement. The view of Vermes, that 1QS and CD reflect the different branches of the Essenes reported by Josephus and that these were complementary and not schismatic, remains the most probable theory.78 Stegemann's thesis that the followers of the Man of the Lie became the Pharisees 79 has some evidence to support it. This evidence consists of the use of stereotypical designations such as "seekers after smooth things" and "Ephraim." In the pesher on Nahum the "seekers after smooth things" appear as opponents of the "Lion of Wrath" who hanged men alive. They are also said to have advised "Demetrius, king of Greece" to enter Jerusalem. The Lion is clearly identifiable as Alexander Jannaeus, and in this context the "seekers" are clearly the Pharisees.80 Ephraim is identified as "the seekers after smooth things at the end of days" and the pesher also refers to "those who lead Ephraim astray" and "lead many astray." Stegemann points out that "leading astray" (ht'h) is a motif associated with the Man of the Lie.81 Also in CD 1, the followers of the Spouter are said to have sought smooth things. The question is whether stereotypical language necessarily has the same referent in different contexts or may have been applied at various times to different opponents of the sect.82 The only passage which may contain information about the halakhic views of the Man of the Lie is found in CD 4:19-5:12. There we are told that the followers of "Precept," a spouter, are caught in two of the three nets of Belial. These are fornication by marrying "two women in their lifetime" and profanation of the Temple by breach of purity and marriage laws. The purity laws in question (sleeping with a menstruating woman) are too general to be helpful. 83 It is interesting, however, that Louis Ginzberg regarded the marriage laws in this passage as a clear exception to what he 77 This passage is sometimes regarded as redactional, but Davies (The Damascus Covenant, 142) makes a case for its authenticity. Rules for the "camps" also appear in CD 12-14. 78 Vermes, The Dead Sea Scrolls, 105-9. 79 Stegemann, Die Entstehung, 250. 80 See E. Schuerer, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (rev. and ed. G. Vermes and F. Millar; Edinburgh: Clark, 1973) 1. 219-28. 81 Stegemann, Die Enstehung, 69-72. 82 See the objections of Murphy-O'Connor, "The Essenes and their History," 240-41. 83 m. Niddah 1: 1-7 shows that the definition of menstrual impurity was subject to various interpretations.

perceived as the Pharisaic character of the book.04 He argued that, despite thousands of differences between rabbis on other matters, "there is not a single case of incestuous marriage on which they are not unanimous." Hence the halakha of the sect would indeed be in conflict with the rabbis on this matter. Against this line of argument, we cannot assume that the views of the earliest Pharisees are accurately reflected in the Mishnah and Talmud, and so the halakhic issues in CD cannot confirm the proposed identification of the followers of the Man of the Lie as Pharisees. That identification does, however, remain possible, even if it cannot be proved conclusively. The Evidence of the Teacher Hymns Thus far we have made little reference to a body of material which many scholars regard as the work of the Teacher of Righteousness himself—the so-called Teacher Hymns. 85 While the ascription of these hymns is necessarily hypothetical, it is plausible.86 The presumed author claims to be a mediator of revelation in a way that is only attested in the case of the Teacher (1QpHab 7:4). Unfortunately, these hymns contain very little biographical information. The most informative passage is found in 1QH 4:5-5:4. 87 Perhaps the most noteworthy claim advanced in this hymn is that "teachers of lies" have banished the author from his land "like a bird from its nest" (1QH 4:8-9). While the hymn does not focus on the individual "Man of the Lie,,‫ י‬he is surely included among these teachers, who are also described as "lying prophets" and "seers of falsehood." The charges against these people are very similar to what we found in the Damascus Document. They have schemed "to exchange the Law engraved on my heart by Thee for the smooth things (which they speak) to Thy people." Their errors concern "feast days" (compare CD 3:14-15), their teachings are described as "snares" (m'sûdôt) and "designs of Belial" (1QH 4:12-13; compare the three m'sûdôt of Belial in CD 4:15), and they say of the vision of 84

L. Ginzberg, An Unknown Jeivish Sect (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary, 1970) 127-30. 85 Jeremias, Der Lehrer, 168-267. H.W. Kuhn (Enderwartung und gegenwärtiges Heil [SUNT 4; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprccht, 1966] 23) lists the most widely accepted Teacher Hymns: 2:1-19; 4:5-29; 5:5-19; 5:20-6:36; 7:6-25; 8:4-40. Jeremias also includes 2:31-39; 3:1-18 and extends two other hymns: 4:5-5:4 and 5:20-7:5. 86 Jeremias (Der Lehrer, 172-73) contrasts the terminology of the Teacher Hymns with that of the rest of the Hodayot. 87 Jeremias, Der Lehm, 211.

knowledge "it is not sure" (1QH 4:18; compare CD 5:12). Their offense includes rejection of the Teacher, but is not only a question of authority. We read in another hymn that the Teacher encountered rebellion within his own community (1QH 5:23-25), and that some who were bound by his testimony were deceived (6:19). While the "lying prophets" may have made inroads among the Teacher's followers, however, there is no indication that the dispute was primarily an innersectarian one. The reasons why the Teacher was driven out were apparently the halakhic ones which are said to have caused the separation of the sect in C D and 4QMMT. It is noteworthy that neither 1QH nor CD makes reference to the "Wicked Priest," who figures so prominendy in the peshanm. This fact is anomalous for the widely held views that a dispute over the priesthood caused the emergence of the community, or that the Teacher was a displaced High Priest when he encountered the Man of the Lie. One possible explanation for the absence of the Wicked Priest in these documents is that the feud with the "teachers of lies" came first and that the Teacher's community had already crystallized as a separate entity before its feud with the High Priest.88 Conclusion Our review of the evidence for the origin of the Qumran community has led us to question several widely held hypotheses. The claim that the sect originated in the Babylonian Exile contradicts the most explicit evidence of the Damascus Document, without adequate warrant. The view that the withdrawal of the sect was caused by a dispute over the High Priestly succession lacks textual evidence to support it. T h e thesis that the Teacher of Righteousness functioned as High Priest during the Intersacerdotium is not only unsupported, but implausible. There is no evidence that the "Man of the Lie" was an Essene leader. The identity of both the Teacher and the "Man of the Lie" remains enigmatic and will probably continue to remain so, unless new evidence is found. We know that both were prophetic figures in the mid-second century BCE They were largely concerned with halakhic matters, although this should certainly not be taken to exclude a concern for metaphysical beliefs or for eschatology.89 88 According to 4QMMT: "we have separated ourselves from the majority of the people...from intermingling in these matters and from participating with them in these [matters]" (Qimron and Strugnell, "An Unpublished Halakhic Letter from Qumran," 402). 89 See further my article "Was the Dead Sea Sect an Apocalyptic Community?"

Attempts to identify either one with figures otherwise known have hitherto been unsuccessful.90 Given the sketchiness of our knowledge of ancient Judaism, this is hardly surprising. While the results of our review have been negative, they may perhaps clear the way for a more realistic appraisal of our limited knowledge on this fascinating topic.

The attempt of J. Carmignac to identify the Teacher with Judah the Essene ("Qui était le Docteur de Justice?" RevQ 10 [1980] 235-46) has been refuted at length by Burgmann (