Upload
lukin-vladimir
View
54
Download
16
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Moses the Dreamer:
Understanding the Vision of Moses within
the Exagoge of Ezekiel the Tragedian
A thesis presented for the degree of PhD in Divinity
at the University of Aberdeen.
By Amber Shadle, MLitt, MTh (University of Aberdeen)
Presented in 2014
2
Salient points
This thesis is on the Exagoge of Ezekiel the Tragedian, a second-century BCE text written in
Greek. The thesis has five main chapters: 1. The Cultural Context, 2. Moses in Biblical
literature, 3. The Exagoge as Tragedy, 4. Exegesis of the Exagoge, 5. Moses Dream and
Early Jewish mysticism. The first chapter surveys Hellenism and Hellenization and the
formation of Hellenistic-Jewish identity. The second chapter looks at the development of
Moses character in the biblical literature. The third chapter asks how the Exagoge might be
considered a tragedy, and how it compares to fifth-century tragedies. The fourth chapter
includes a translation of the text from Greek, followed by a line-by-line exegesis of the text.
The fifth chapter looks at the dream sequence in the Exagoge and its similarities to 1 Enoch,
discussing its relationship to early Jewish mysticism.
3
Confirmation
I confirm that this thesis has been composed by Amber Shadle, the candidate. It has not been
accepted in any previous application for a degree, the work has been done by the candidate,
and all quotations have been distinguished by quotation marks and the sources of information
specifically acknowledged.
Signature:____________________________________________
Date:______________________________________________
4
Table of Contents
Introduction 7
Chapter 1: The Cultural Context 10
1. Introduction 10
2. Alexander, Egypt, and the city of Alexandria 11
3. Definitions of Hellenism 17
3.1 Jewish Identity 22
4. Hellenistic-Jewish Literature 27
4.1 The Septuagint 28
Chapter 2: Moses in Biblical Literature 32
1. Introduction 32
2. The Moses of the Pentateuch 33
2.1 Infancy to Exile 35
2.2 Moses in Midian 39
2.3 The Plagues and Exodus 42
2.4 The Wilderness Wanderings 46
2.4.1 The Visit of Jethro 46
2.4.2 The Rebellion of Korah 47
2.4.3 The Sinai Theophany 49
2.4.4 The Death of Moses 51
2.5 Conclusions 58
5
Chapter 3: The Exagoge as Tragedy 59
1. Introduction 59
2. Sources for the text of the Exagoge 65
3. Ezekiel the Author 68
4. Exagoge and Tragedy 70
5. Moses as a Tragic Figure 83
Chapter 4: Exegesis of the Exagoge 86
1. The Greek Text 86
2. Translation 98
3. Introduction 111
4. Lines 1-67: Setting the Scene 112
4.1 Lines 1-31: Moses Introduction 113
4.2 Lines 32-58: Moses kill the Egyptian 128
4.3 Lines 59-65: Sepphoras Introduction 134
4.4 Lines 66-67: Sepphora and Chum 136
5. Lines 68-82: Moses Dream and Raguels Interpretation 138
5.1 Lines 83-89: Raguels Interpretation of the Dream 148
6. Lines 90-131: The Burning Bush 149
6.1 Lines 120-131: Moses Staff 155
7. Lines 132-174: The Plagues 156
7.1 Lines 175-192: Passover Regulations 161
8. Lines 193-242: The Red Sea 162
9. Lines 243-253: The Scouts Report 164
9.1 Lines 254-269: The Phoenix 167
6
Chapter 5: Moses Dream and Early Jewish Mysticism 173
1. Introduction 173
2. The Cosmic Mountain 175
2.1 The Cosmic Mountain: In the Hebrew Scriptures 176
3. Hellenistic-Jewish Literature and Later Jewish Tradition 179
4. Enoch and Moses 181
5. Conclusion 197
Bibliography 198
7
Introduction
In the centuries following Eusebius inclusion of excerpts from the Exagoge in his
Praeparatio Evangelica, Ezekiel the Tragedians text was effectively forgotten, buried
beneath the dust of nearly two millennia. The reason behind this was possibly that his play
did not compare favourably to those of the fifth-century tragedians. His creation was not
enough like the beautifully polished works of Aeschylus, Sophocles or Euripides, and was
written too late to be of much interest to scholars of the classical period. We find that when
the Exagoge is mentioned, it is in relation to the misunderstanding that it was written by the
biblical Ezekiel,1 or the authors mistaken Greek identity. From the latter part of the
nineteenth century, however, Ezekiels text has resurfaced within scholarship as something
worth studying in its own right. Partially driving the interest in the text is that Ezekiel does
what no other author of Hellenistic Jewish literature has done: he takes the life of Moses, and
therefore the story of the Exodus, one of the seminal moments for Jewish religion and self-
definition, and turns it into a tragedy.
Since Kuiper, Wieneke, and Kappelmacher revived awareness of Ezekiels text in the
early 20th-century, there has been a small explosion of interest in the work, with articles
appearing in various journals, and Jacobson and Lanfranchis seminal monographs appearing
in the past thirty years. Jacobson and Lanfranchi tend to focus on the linguistic aspects of the
text, Ezekiels reliance upon Aeschylus and Euripides, and the texts connection to early
Midrash and retellings of the biblical narratives. Some scholars, like Gruenwald and van der
Horst, have focused their attention on the potential mystical aspects of the text, in particular
the dream sequence towards the middle of the Exagoge. In this study we will not attempt to
go over ground which has already been well-trod. Instead, we will discuss the linguistic
features of the text when they are vital for properly understanding what the author meant, or
when we disagree with a commonly held opinion. The text will be divided into five chapters,
with the following structure:
Chapter 1 will discuss the cultural and social context of second-century BCE
Alexandria. It will begin with a survey of the Alexandrian conquests, before moving on to
1 Bayle, Pierre. Dictionnaire historique et critique, Nouvelle edition augmente de notes extradites de Caufepi,
Joly, La Monnoie, Leduchat, L.-J. Leclerc, Prosper Marchand, etc., Tome VI. (Paris: Desoer, 1820). Eschiel (F), p. 274.
8
discuss the spread of Hellenism within the Jewish community. We discuss in detail what it
meant to be Hellenised, and the ways in which Hellenised Jews created their self-identity. We
will close the chapter with a brief discussion of the translation of the Septuagint, since this
was most likely the source Ezekiel used for his text of the Exodus. The aim of this chapter is
to provide a firm understanding of the context in which the Exagoge was created, and perhaps
give us some insight into Ezekiels life as a Hellenised Jew.
Chapter 2 will focus on the development of Moses character the Pentateuch. We will
look at how his character changes and diverges over the course of the narrative, and how this
had an effect on later re-interpreters of the Hebrew scriptures, including those of Philo,
Josephus, and of course, Ezekiel. In contrast to the over-simplified depictions of Moses as a
flawlessly humble and meek man, we will find that the Moses of the Hebrew Scriptures was
imperfect, and sometimes rash. We will examine certain episodes from his life to try to
discover why he was condemned to die outside of the Promised Land, and how his death
might help us to understand why Ezekiel decided to re-write the Exodus as a tragedy.
Chapter 3 will discuss tragedy as a genre, its origins, its later interpretations, and its
constituent parts. We will examine a variety of Greek tragedies to discover what which traits
are generally found in a tragic hero, and how to interpret the often misunderstood concept of
hamartia. We will then turn our attention to Moses as a character and the ways that he might
be considered to be a tragic hero. Only once we have understood Moses tragic potential can
we then correctly interpret Ezekiels play.
Chapter 4 will begin with the Greek text of the Exagoge, collected from the extant
fragments, followed by a translation of the text into English.. We will move through the text,
line by line, and try to come to a better understanding of its nuances. As stated above, this is
not a purely linguistic study, but rather a treatment of the play as a piece of literature, which
seeks to follow its narrative logic. In this section we will examine the dream of Moses in-
depth, comparing it to dreams in the classical tragedies to see which features they share and
how Ezekiel differs. Moses dream is perhaps one of the most interesting aspects of the text,
especially as it relates to the question of the development of early Jewish mysticism.
Chapter 5 will focus on the dream in particular, and its potential relationship to 1
Enoch. In both the Exagoge and 1 Enoch a figure from the Jewish scriptural tradition ascends
to heaven, encounters the deity on his throne, and is shown the mysteries of the cosmos,
before being sent back to earth. In the Exagoge Moses vision is presented as just a dream,
9
and we will discuss how this interpretation possibly acts as a safeguard for the author, since
his text effectively divinises Moses. Even though Jewish religious practice was flexible in
Ezekiels era, he still had to obscure his exaltation of Moses behind a smoke-screen.
It is our goal to approach this text as both a literary critic and a biblical scholar. It is
necessary to read the play as literature in order to fully recognize its narrative flow and
devices. It is hoped that the discussions on what makes the biblical character of Moses tragic,
the ways in which the Exagoge fits into the mould of classical tragedies, the identity of the
figure on the throne (and the result of his interaction with Moses), and the potential
relationship to 1 Enoch will bring something new to the scholarship surrounding the
Exagoge. Even though there are only 269 extant lines from the text, we have only just begun
to understand its nuances. The relationship of the play to the development of early Jewish
mysticism in particular is an area in which much work can be done.
During the writing of this thesis I am indebted to many people who have read, re-read,
and offered constructive criticism to my fledgling arguments. I am grateful for the support of
my supervisor, Professor Joachim Schaper, who patiently read early drafts of my thesis, and
guided and encouraged me along the way. I also wish to thank my family who have
supported me throughout this long process of living and studying abroad. Finally, I would
like to thank my husband, Simon, who was always there to encourage and support me
throughout the process of the PhD.
10
Chapter 1
The Cultural Context
1. Introduction
In this chapter we will undertake the necessary task of establishing the cultural and social
context in which the Exagoge was written. The author of the play, Ezekiel the Tragedian as he come
to be known, most likely lived in Alexandria, Egypt,2 around the mid-second century BCE.3 Ezekiel
was Jewish and, as we may conclude from his choice of subject matter, was well versed in the
traditions and texts of his people. He was also more than familiar with Greek culture, as demonstrated
by his decision to rewrite the Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt as a Greek tragedy, his familiarity
with and reliance upon the fifth century playwrights,4 and his knowledge and use of the Greek
language. What this means for our text is that the author inhabited a world which was shaped by both
the prevailing forces of Hellenism and also by the traditions and texts of Second Temple Judaism. In
order to interpret his text correctly, it is essential that we are familiar with the world of the author,
including the historical events which created that world. For the Exagoge, this means that we need to
understand Hellenism, Hellenization, and the Jewish response to the powerful influence of Greek
culture, religion, and politics. The Exagoge is a product of the synthesis of these two cultures, and in
order to comprehend fully the balancing act which Ezekiel undertakes, we must first understand
exactly what it is that he is balancing between.
2 On the Alexandrian provenance of the play see Howard Jacobson, The Exagoge of Ezekiel (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1983), 13-17; Pieter van der Horst, Some Notes on the Exagoge of Ezekiel, Mnemosyne 37 (1984): 357. R. G. Robertson, Ezekiel the Tragedian, in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (New York: Doubleday, 1985), 804. Peter M. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972),
707. Kuiper, on the other hand, suggests that Ezekiel was writing from Samaria. K. Kuiper, Le pote juif Ezchiel, Revue des tudes juives 46 (1903): 48-73, 161-177. See also Moses Gaster, The Samaritans: Their History, Doctrines and Literature (London: Oxford University Press, 1925), 143. However, scholars generally
agree that the play was most likely composed in Alexandria. 3 See Jacobson, Exagoge, 5-13. Roughly speaking, the Exagoge is usually dated to sometime between the
completion of the Septuagint, (with which Ezekiel was familiar) in the second century BCE, and the lifetime of
Alexander Polyhistor (first half of the first century BCE), who is our ultimate source for the surviving fragments
of the play (Jacobson, Exagoge, 6). Jacobson presents various arguments to support his case for dating the text
to sometime in the second century BCE, and specifically to the latter part of the century, but most convincing is
his point that the play was likely meant to be performed before an audience of both Jews and Greeks, which
suggests that the Jewish-Greek relationship was still positive--a date in the first century would be too late as the
relationship had deteriorated by that point (Jacobson, Exagoge, 8). Even though he considers it a small point, Jacobsons observation that the second century was a significant time for Jewish literature written in Greek (citing Sirach, the Jewish Sibyl, the Septuagint Daniel and others as examples of the literary output of the
period) is an important note to keep in mind (Jacobson, Exagoge, 11). A text such as the Exagoge, which is
perhaps one of the most unique products of Hellenistic Jewish literature, would only have been possible in a
literary environment which encouraged retelling and expansion on the biblical materials. 4 See Jacobson, Exagoge, 23-28
11
The following pages give an account of the history and nature of Hellenism and Hellenization
encountered both by the Jews living in Alexandria, and also those in the wider Hellenized world. This
chapter will begin with a general survey of the events precipitated by Alexanders wars, continue with
a discussion of the Jewish communities in Palestine and the Diaspora, before moving on to a
consideration of Hellenization and its impact on Jewish self-identification. We will close the chapter
with a brief discussion of the Septuagint as an example of Hellenistic-Jewish literature. While there
are many texts which we could discuss here,5 the Septuagint arguably has had the largest impact on
Jewish writing following its completion, and it is very likely the source for the biblical account of the
Exodus which Ezekiel used. A survey of the literature produced on the subject of the Septuagint could
be a book in its own right, and our concern here is not to discuss every nuance of its composition and
reception. We will, however, examine it as an example of a literary work which undertakes the same
sort of balancing act between cultures as Ezekiels text.
2. Alexander, Egypt, and the City of Alexandria
From the Classical to the Hellenistic period, Greek civilization underwent significant changes.
Morton Smith notes that Classical Greece was centered around small holdings, the ordinary citizen,
local customs and city cults, and direct political involvement by the citizenship; however, in
Hellenistic Greece the small holdings were replaced by large estates, the ordinary citizen politicians
were replaced by trained bureaucrats, local customs gave way to explicit laws, and in everything a
professional approach prevailed.6 While the traditional narrative of the Hellenistic era begins with
Alexander the Great and his military conquestsspecifically his subjugation of the Persian Empire
5For Eusebius Praeparatio Evangelica. See: Die Praeparatio evangelica, trans. Karl Mras (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1954-1956). Eusebius. Praeparatio Evangelica (Preparation for the Gospel). Vol. 15, trans. E. H.
Gifford (Oxford: Typographea Academico/ H. Frowde, 1903). There are far too many examples of Hellenistic
Jewish literature to cite here, but a few notable examples are: Demetrius the historian: Fragments were
preserved by Alexander Polyhistor, then quoted in Eusebius PE book IX. See: E. J. Bickerman, The Jewish Historian Demetrios, in Christianity, Judaism, and Other Greco-Roman Cults, ed. J. Neusner (Leiden: Brill, 1975), 72-84; Collins, John J. Between Athens and Jerusalem. (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2000), 27-30;
P. M. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972), pp. 690-94. Artapanus: fragments
preserved by Alexander Polyhistor, then quoted in Eusebius PE book IX. See: Yehoshua, Gutman, The Beginnings of Jewish Hellenistic Literature, Vol. 2 (Jerusalem: Bialik, 1966), 109-35; Carl Holladay, Theios
Aner in Hellenistic Judaism (Missoula: Scholars Press, 1977), 199-232. The Letter of Aristeas: Translation:
Moses Hadas, Aristeas to Philocrates (letter of Aristeas) (New York: Harper, 1974); See: John R. Bartlett, Jews
in the Hellenistic World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985), 11-32; D. W. Gooding, Aristeas and Septuagint Origins: A Review of Recent Studies, Vetus Testamentum, Vol. 13, Fasc. 4 (1963): 357-379; Victor Tcherikover, Victor, The Ideology of the Letter of Aristeas, The Harvard Theological Review, Vol. 51, No. 2 (1958): 59-85; Sylvie Honigman, The Septuagint and Homeric Scholarship in Alexandria (London: Routledge,
2003). Ben Sira: See Michael Coogan, ed., The New Oxford Annotated Apocrypha: New Revised Standard
Version (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001); George W. E. Nickelsburg, Jewish Literature between the
Bible and the Mishnah (London: SCM Press Ltd., 1981), 55; Yigael Yadin, The ben Sira Scroll from Masada.
(Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 1965). There are many other texts which could be cited in this footnote,
but the texts above were chosen because of the way they demonstrate the interaction between Greek and Jewish
thought and culture. For a complete collection of the Hellenistic-Jewish literature available, see Carl Holladay,
Fragments from Hellenistic Jewish Authors. Vols 1-3. (Chico: Scholars Press, c1983-c1996). 6 Morton Smith, Palestinian Parties and Politics That Shaped the Old Testament (New York: Columbia
University Press, 1971), 77, 78.
12
Smith suggests that the domination of Greek culture began long before Alexander claimed large
swaths of the Mediterranean world for his empire.7 As early as 420 BCE the Persian army had begun
to employ Greek mercenaries and, although they were not aware of it, these mercenaries did more
than simply assist the Persian military effort.8 Smith writes: Along with this military penetration by
Greek forces went economic and cultural penetration by Greek traders, Greek merchandise, and Greek
ways.9 At this early period, the reach of Greek culture was beginning to assert itself, although those
conquered by the Persian army, and the Persian rulers themselves, would hardly have suspected that
an even more pervasive subjugation had taken place that would prove more influential over time than
a mere change of rulers.
This would seem to suggest that Hellenism was an unstoppable force, with an unavoidable
cultural impact on those who were conquered during the course of the various wars waged by Persians
and Greeks. In a way it was, since those who wanted to advance in society at all would have had to
adopt the ways of the conquerors. Victor Tcherikover, however, offers a slightly different account of
the interaction between Greeks and the conquered peoples, focusing particularly on those living in
Egypt. In his account, the Greek settlers in Egyptian towns were the ones who went through the
process of assimilation, not the local population. Mixed marriages, combined with the pressures of
local religious customs and language, ensured that a new mixed stock, derived from both nations,
replaced the first Greeks who had settled in Egypt in the third century.10 Tcherikover writes that it
was the oriental village which possessed the power of fusing the strangers with itself and of
obliterating their intellectual and national character.11 This process was perhaps encouraged by the
propensity of the conquering Greeks to build cities either next to or on top of existing towns. Since the
peoples were intermixing, Tcherikover suggests, the traditional distinction between who was a Greek
became less attached to ethnicity and more associated with a common culture.12
While the cultural exchange certainly went both ways, it would be a mistake to conclude, like
many conventional narratives do, that Alexander was the great bringer of concord, a symbol of the
universal obligation to strive for homonoia, the concert of nations.13 While the Greek conquerors
were not as concerned with bringing a universal and benevolent culture to the barbarians as they
were with expanding their power, even some of the earliest sources promote the idea of a golden age
7 For a discussion of this narrative, see Harald Hegermann, The Diaspora in the Hellenistic Age, in The Cambridge History of Judaism, Vol. 2, ed. W. D. Davies and Louis Finkelstein (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1989), 115. 8 Morton Smith, Palestinian Parties and Politics That Shaped the Old Testament (New York: Columbia
University Press, 1971), 60. 9 Smith, Palestinian Parties and Politics, 60. 10 Victor Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization and the Jews, trans. S. Applebaum (Philadelphia: The Jewish
Publication Society of America, 1961), 21. 11 Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization, 21. 12 Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization, 30. 13 Hegermann, The Diaspora in the Hellenistic Age, 125.
13
of concord.14 After the conquest of Egypt, for example, Alexander tried to present his army as
freedom-bringers, with some success.15 The Persians were not the most popular in Egypt, and
Alexander took pains to ensure that the local population did not have reason to resent the new
government.16 Malcolm Errington notes that, [t]he problems of adaptation to the Egyptian
sociopolitical environment were, however, much greater for Ptolemy than they had been for
Alexander, who after his initial immediate demonstration of sympathy for things Egyptian had
quickly moved on.17 Alexander the conqueror was politically savvy, and it was only a matter of time
before the Egyptians grew unhappy with their new rulers.18
The cultural exchange between the Greeks and the conquered peoples did have its limits.
Tcherikover notes that the local inhabitants who mingled with the citizens altered the human material
of which the Greek polis was composed, but the political and juridical form remained unmodified by
them.19 In other words, while ordinary individuals living in Greek cities might have interacted with
and been influenced by people from a diverse set of backgrounds, the power overwhelmingly rested in
Greek hands. A common Hellenic lineage, along with Greek education, was emphasized by those
wishing to bar non-Greeks from Greek citizenship.20 Martin Hengel notes that the Greeks considered
so-called barbarians to be bestial, hostile to strangers, despotic or enslaved, superstitious, cruel,
cowardly and faithless.21 Naturally, Hengel points out, we can understand how individual
barbarian cities and peoples were very concerned either to reconstruct some original relationship
14 See for example Plutarch, who writes that [t]hose who were subdued by Alexander are more fortunate than those who escaped him, for the latter had no one to rescue them from their wretched life, while the victorious
Alexander compelled the former to enjoy a better existence. De Alexandri Magni Fortuna aut Virtute, I 138c-329D, quoted in M. M. Austin, The Hellenistic world from Alexander to the Roman conquest (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1981), 36. Austin notes that such speeches given by Plutarch demonstrate that
modern theories of Alexander the champion of the fusion of races or of the brotherhood of mankind have their starting point in ancient sources. Austin, The Hellenistic World, 35. 15 Errington writes that in stark contrast with the Persians Alexander treated Egyptian traditions and the
Egyptian governing classes, especially the administrators and the priests, with respect, leaving the regional
administration largely untouched in detail when he marched on in 311. R. Malcolm Errington, A History of the
Hellenistic World: 323-30 BC (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2008), 145. 16 Ian Shaw notes: It is most appropriate to begin the study of Ptolemaic Egypt with the arrival of Alexander the Great in 332 BC, thus bringing to an end the Second Persian Period, the passing of which was lamented by
no one. Ian Shaw, The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 388. 17 Errington, A History of the Hellenistic World, 145. 18 Shaw notes the limits of the initial positive reception of the Greek conquerors: The relationship between the Graeco-Macedonian elite and their Egyptian subjects in the earlier phase of Ptolemaic rule is not always clear
and, where it is, it shows some inconsistency. Shaw, Oxford History of Ancient Egypt, 405. However, the situation changes from the third century BCE: In Egypt outside Alexandria the political situation rapidly deteriorated from the late third century BC onwards, as the country seethed with internal discord. Shaw, Oxford History of Ancient Egypt, 411. This discord included strikes, flightbrigandage, attacks by desperados on villages, despoliation of temples, and frequent recourse to the temples right of asylum. These are indisputably the reactions of people pushed beyond the limits of endurance by famine, rampant inflation, and an oppressive
and vicious administrative system. Shaw, Oxford History of Ancient Egypt, 411-412. This made for an extremely tense political environment, and ultimately contributed to the downfall of the Ptolemaic Kingdom in
30 BCE. 19 Tcherikover, Hellenistic Civilization, 36. 20 Martin Hengel, Jews, Greeks and Barbarians, trans. John Bowden (London: SCM Press Ltd., 1980), 58. 21 Hengel, Jews, Greeks and Barbarians, 55.
14
with the Greeks or at least to regard themselves as an early Hellenic colony.22 The struggle for
recognition by the Greeks was a constant process, for both Jewish and non-Jewish barbarians,
especially for those who wanted to advance economically or politically.
Let us now move on from the general situation of life for non-Greeks, to the specific
provenance of Ezekiels text. During his campaign of (known-)world domination, Alexander the
Great founded many cities, but Alexandria on the Nile Delta is by far the most celebrated.23 Fraser
divides the population of the city into rough categories composed of native Egyptians, Greeks of
various social status, foreigners who were neither ethnically Egyptian nor Greek, and slaves.24 During
the initial conquest, the Egyptian attitudes towards the Macedonian-Greek army was positive;
however, once the charismatic head of the empire was dead and the warring factions had taken over
the Egyptians began to resent their non-citizen status.25 The ruling class consisted entirely of foreign
leaders, a fact which grated on those who had traditionally led the country.26 Once Alexander was
gone, the land which he had conquered was divided up among the warring factions of his successors,
and Ptolemy I Soter was appointed satrap of Egypt in 323 BCE. The Egypt in which Ezekiel lived was
ruled by the descendants of Ptolemy Soter: Ptolemy V Epiphanes, Ptolemy VI Philometor, or Ptolemy
VIII Euergetes II, depending on when in the second century we place the composition of the text.27
There was a sizeable Jewish population in the city of Alexandria, and scholars have created
various accounts of the situation of this community within Egypt. Some, like Arnaldo Momigliano,
have painted a fairly positive picture of the status of those Jews who lived in Alexandria. According
to Momigliano, [a]s long as the Jews got on reasonably well with the Greek population of Alexandria
and had the support of the Ptolemies, Egyptian hostility was not of decisive importance.28 In his
Antiquities of the Jews, Josephus writes about the supposed favor shown by Alexander himself to the
Jewish community in Egypt. According to Josephus, Alexander was so impressed with the way the
Jews observed their oaths and covenants that he granted them equal rights as citizens within
22 Hengel, Jews, Greeks and Barbarians, 57. 23 For a collection of primary sources which relate to Alexanders reign and his successors, see Austin, The Hellenistic World.) See in particular the comparison of the accounts given by Arrian and Plutarch about the
founding of the city (page 17). 24 P. M. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, Vol. I (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1972), 38. 25 Shaw, Oxford History of Ancient Egypt, 411-412. 26 F. W. Walbank, The Hellenistic World (Glasgow: William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd., 1981), 115. There were,
however, some Egyptians who interacted closely with the ruling Greeks. See A. B. Lloyd, The Egyptian Elite
in the Early Ptolemaic Period: Some Hieroglyphic Evidence, In The Hellenistic World: New Perspective,. Ed.
Daniel Ogden (Swansea: Classical Press of Wales and Duckworth, 2002), 117-36. 27 For an extended discussion of the rule of the Ptolemies in Egypt, see J. G. Manning, The Last Pharaohs:
Egypt under the Ptolemies, 305-30 BC (Princeton University Press: Princeton, 2009). While this thesis focuses
on the interaction between Jewish and Greek culture and society, Susan Stephens has written an illuminating
monograph on the interaction between Greek and Egyptian cultures, specifically during the reign of the
Ptolemies, and how this interaction is expressed through the poetic output of the period. See Susan Stephens,
Seeing Double: Intercultural Poetics in Ptolemaic Alexandria (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003). 28 Arnaldo Momigliano, Greek Culture and the Jews, in The Legacy of Greece: A New Appraisal, ed. Moses.
I. Finley (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1981), 334.
15
Alexandria, rights on par with the privileges given to the Macedonians.29 Josephus account was most
likely a product of apologetic imagination: According to Hegermann, during the later Roman period
the Jews were in fact trying to defend themselves against a recent deterioration in their civic status
which itself went back to the very origins of the city.30 By claiming that the Conqueror himself had
bestowed certain privileges upon his people, Josephus was attempting to appeal to tradition in order to
help bolster the position of the Jews living in Palestine in his own time.
While Josephus account does not accurately represent the relationship between Alexander
and the Jews in Egypt, we do know that the Jewish community in Alexandria was given a certain
amount of autonomy. However, the extent of the privileges enjoyed by the Jewish community is
difficult to determine. Bickerman suggests that since Alexandria was a Greek polis, there was, early
on, the possibility that a foreigner, by adopting Greek culture (and probably spending a fair amount of
money) could become a citizen.31 However, Bickerman agrees with Fraser that even though a Jew
may have been born in Alexandria, he still could not enjoy the full rights of a citizen.32 The
Alexandrian Jews were therefore perpetually locked in the middle position, unable to gain the status
of full citizens, and yet not considered one with the local Egyptian population.33
Fraser notes that although Jews occur frequently in Ptolemaic Alexandria, and in Ptolemaic
Egypt as a whole, we possess no contemporary statement of principle regarding their status from this
period.34 We are left looking to accounts from authors who lived hundreds of years later. While
Fraser does not judge Josephus account of Alexanders bestowal of citizenship to the Jews in
Alexandria to be accurate, he does consider Strabos account of a separate Jewish community within
Alexandria to be a far more reliable witness.35 Strabo describes a community which was ruled by an
ethnarch and was semi-autonomous; this community, Fraser suggests, was inhabited by Jews who
were on a higher cultural level than the Egyptians, and, as the surviving works of Jewish-Greek
literature of the third and second centuries show, the Greek culture which they acquired was of a
superior quality.36 While we reserve judgment about the quality of the Greek culture absorbed by
the various groups in Alexandria, we may agree that the Hellenistic-Jewish literature of the third and
second centuries BCE does demonstrate a significant interaction with and absorption of Greek culture.
29 Josephus, Flavius. Antiquities of the Jews, 12.1 30 Hegermann, The Diaspora in the Hellenistic Age, 121. 31 Elias J. Bickerman, The Jews in the Greek Age (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1988),
87, 88. 32 Bickerman, The Jews in the Greek Age, 88. 33 See Hengel on the Jews as a third class. Martin Hengel, The Interpenetration of Judaism and Hellenism in
the Pre-Maccabean Period, in The Cambridge History of Judaism, Volume Two, ed. W. D. Davies and Louis
Finkelstein (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989), 173. 34 Fraser, PA, 54. 35 Fraser, PA, 54. 36 Fraser, PA, 57.
16
Joseph Mlze-Modrzejewski notes that Jews in Alexandria were able to maintain their
religious observances while interacting regularly with the surrounding Greek culture, a feat which was
not possible in other, less cosmopolitan cities.37 Momigliano goes so far as to suggest that the Jews
of Egypt maintained prestige, gained prosperity, and developed an intellectual physiognomy of their
own at least until A.D. 50.38 Overall, though, we do not know very much about the actual lives and
social position of Jews who lived in Alexandria in the 3rd century BCE.39 It is clear from the literary
testimony that there was interaction with the wider Greek cultural forces, while at the same time the
Jews were able to maintain their own religious traditions.
Finally, it is worth mentioning the positive relationship which Jews within the Diaspora
maintained with the Jewish community in Palestine. Egypt increasingly grew in importance for the
Diaspora community, however, Momigliano writes, Jerusalem, not Alexandria, was the place where
the future of Judaism was played out.40 While the community in Egypt thrived, there was a constant
link to Palestine, especially in the form of the Temple and the land. With the coming of the Persians,
as we saw above, the Greek influence on the Palestinian district grew, and Greek pressure through
economic and military connections expanded to include cultural infiltration as well.41 The military
occupation also shifted the focus of the Jewish leadership away from kingship to an aristocratic
priesthood.42 Even as Jews in the Diaspora sent regular donations to the Jerusalem Temple and shared
in an exchange of ideas and writings, the daily life of those outside of Palestine began to revolve
around more local institutions.43 The history surrounding the development of early synagogues is
often unclear. However, by the mid-second century BCE something like a synagogue was beginning
to develop, and it was these cultural centers which sustained their community, acting as a social and
religious space.44 These early synagogues, Feldman notes, were much more than houses of prayer
37 Joseph Mlze-Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, trans. Robert Cornman (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1995),
82. 38Momigliano, Greek Culture and the Jews, 334. 39 Fraser notes: we know very little regarding the organization of the Persians and other foreigners, apart from those in military settlements. We have little information regarding foreign racial groups, except the Jews and the
Romans, and no indication survives as to how they were organized in Alexandria. Fraser, PA, 59. 40 Momigliano, Greek Culture and the Jews, 335. 41 See Hengels discussion of the infiltration of Hellenism into Jewish culture in Palestine, Martin Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism, Vol. 1 (London: SCM Press, 1974), 58-103. 42 Peter Green, Alexander to Actium: The Hellenistic Age (London: Thames and Hudson Ltd., 1990), 501. 43 Ibid. See also Lee Levine, The Ancient Synagogue: The First Thousand Years (Yale University Press: New
Haven, 2000), 74-89. Levine discusses the importance of the synagogue with the Alexandrian Jewish
community in particular, and its reliance on royal recognition and support for its communal institutions. Levine, The Ancient Synagogue, 77. The dedication of a synagogue to a ruler was partially due to customs
regarding building dedication within Egypt, and partially because such dedications declare the synagogue inviolate, and hence, protected. Levine, The Ancient Synagogue, 77. 44 Levine has argued extensively that the origins of the synagogue can be traced back to the role and importance
of city gates in ancient Israel. See Levine, The Ancient Synagogue,19-41. See L. Lw, Der synagogale Ritus, in MGWJ 33 (1884): 97-114 for an extensive discussion of the function of the city gate in both social and
religions contexts. Other scholars, locate the origins of the synagogue in the Babylonian exile: H. Rowley,
Worship in Ancient Israel: Its Forms and Meaning. (London: S.P.C.K., 1967), 224; G. F. Moore, Judaism in the
First Centuries of the Christian Era: The Age of the Tannaim, Vol. 1 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press,
17
and study, they served as the centers of Jewish social, cultural, and even political life.45 When we
discuss the text of the Exagoge, we will return to the synagogue, and the possibility that Ezekiels
play was meant to be performed in one of these Alexandrian meeting houses.
3. Definitions of Hellenism
The preceding survey of the Hellenistic society in Alexandria, although brief, will help us to
understand the historical context of the Exagoge, and the society in which the author lived. We will
now turn our attention to Hellenism, and discuss in a more detailed way what it meant for an
Alexandrian Jew, such as Ezekiel, to be Hellenized. In this section we will survey various
discussions of Hellenism offered by scholars, and present a working definition which will be used
throughout the remainder of this thesis.
According to Ralph Marcus, [t]he Greek noun hellenistes commonly meant a non-Greek
speaker of Greek or imitator of Greek fashion.46 He goes on to conclude that the Hellenistic age is
especially interesting to us because it saw the birth and early nurturing of a world-consciousness in
philosophy, law, religion and politicsthese forms of universalism or cosmopolitanism were
sufficiently developed in the Hellenistic age to provide thought and impulse to action for many
centuries.47 Gabriele Boccaccini, however, points out that the word Hellenic was not originally used
to denote a utopian exchange of cultures: the verb hellniz and the noun hellnismos were never
used in ancient sources to denote the mixing of cultures, but rather the contribution given by Hellenic
culture to the new civilization.48 Martin Hengel also rejects the idea that Alexander was interested in
spreading a universal, humanitarian world culture as a later trend projected back on to Alexander and
his successors: Alexander, Hengel writes, began his expedition as a war of vengeance, and thus had
little interest in fostering the mixing of cultures49 Within the groups conquered by Alexanders army,
1927), 283. See Anders Runessons extensive discussion of the multitude of theories about the origins of the synagogue: Anders Runesson, The Origins of the Synagogue: A Social-Historical Study (Stockholm: Almquist
& Wiksell International, 2001), 67-168. As for the synagogue in Egypt, Runesson writes that no uniform picture existed as late as the second century BCE, buta general development away from animal sacrifices, though retaining vegetable and incense offerings, had taken place at this time. It was also around this period that
public torah (sic) readings were incorporated into these institutions. Runesson, Origins, 481. This sort of loosely organised meeting place is possibly the most natural location for Ezekiels play to have been performed. 45 Louis Feldman, Jew and Gentile in the Ancient World (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993), 63. 46 Ralph Marcus, Hellenistic Jewish Literature, in The Jews: Their Religion and Culture, ed. Louis Finkelstein (New York: Schocken Books, 1975), 43. 47 Ralph Marcus, Hellenistic Jewish Literature, 43. 48 Gabriele Boccaccini, Hellenistic Judaism: Myth or Reality? in Jewish Literatures and Cultures: Context and Intertext, ed. Anita Norich and Yaron Z. Eliav (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008), 56. See in
contrast Ralph Marcus, Hellenistic Jewish Literature, in The Jews, ed. Louis Finkelstein (New York: Schocken Books, 1975), 43. 49 Martin Hengel, Jews, Greeks and Barbarians, trans. John Bowden (London: SCM Press Ltd, 1980), 52. It
must be noted, however, that the idea that Alexanders campaign was actually a positive change for the newly conquered people can be found in early sources. Austin cites a speech given by Plutarch in which the benefits
bestowed by Alexander upon the conquered peoples are discussed. Austin, The Hellenistic World, 35. He notes
that the speeches may only be rhetorical exercises, however [t]hey are important nonetheless in showing how
18
the upper class did make an effort to become a part of the Hellenized world; however, expansive
Hellenization did not stretch into all levels of society until the Romans, with their drive towards
Hellenization of barbarians.50 The literary and philosophical elements of Hellenism came second to
the political and social prerogatives.
When we come to the response of the Jewish communities within Palestine and the Diaspora,
Hengel argues that Hellenism gained ground as an intellectual power in Jewish Palestine early and
tenaciously.51 From the middle of the third century BCE, all Judaism must really be designated
Hellenistic Judaism, which makes the traditional differentiation between Palestinian and
Hellenistic Judaism obsolete.52 This Hellenism embraced every sphere of life, not just the military,
civic, and socio-economic areas.53 Hengels definition radically challenged the assumption that
Hellenism was somehow limited in its scope to the upper-classes or to the Jews in the Diaspora only.
This means that escape from the influence of Hellenization was impossible, even for those who
attempted to resist its cultural and religious forms. And even if an individual did attempt to resist
Hellenization, Peter Green reminds us that Hellenism was not necessarily spread by conscious
choice, but rather by unconscious, or incidental, processes: Borrowings and adaptations, then, we
would expect to find in those areas that, first, required no linguistic skill and, second, were commonly
accessible without conscious intellectual effort: that is, the visual arts, architecture, and music.54
Even religious borrowings were adapted so much that they were no longer recognized as the
contribution of an outside culture.55
While Hengels position is largely accepted today, Louis Feldman offers an alternative theory
to Hengels dictum of early and tenaciously. Feldmans counter-position is neatly summarized in
his statement that the question to ask is not how thoroughly Jews and Judaism in the Land of Israel
were Hellenized, but how strongly they resisted Hellenization.56 Even in the Diaspora, the
persistence of local traditions indicates that there was no more than a superficial Hellenization in
much of Asia Minor, the Near East, and Egypt.57 Feldman supports his argument by pointing to the
Alexanders aims and achievements lend themselves to rhetorical amplification: modern theories of Aleander the cchampion of the fusion of races or of the brotherhood of mankind have their starting point in ancient sources. Ibid. To cite Plutarch directly: Those who were subdued by Alexander are more fortunate than those who escaped him, for the latter had no one to rescue them from their wretched life, while the victorious
Alexander compelled the former to enjoy a better existence. From Plutarch, De Aleandri Magni Fortuna aut Virtute, I 328 C329 D. Cited in Austin, The Hellenistic World, 36. 50 Hengel, Jews, 54. 51 Hengel, Martin. Judaism and Hellenism, Vol I (London: SCM Press Ltd., 1974), 104. 52 Hengel, Judaism, 105. 53 Hengel, Judaism, 56, 57. 54 Green, Alexander to Actium, 315. 55 Green, Alexander to Actium, 316. 56Louis Feldman, Jew and Gentile, 44. See also Feldmans criticism of Hengels arguments about the extent of Hellenization within the various Jewish communities: Louis Feldman, Hengels Judaism and Hellenism in Retrospect, in Journal of Biblical Literature, 96 (1977), 371-82. 57 Feldman, Jew and Gentile, 42.
19
war with the Romans, which he interprets as an indication that the Jews were in opposition to
Hellenistic culture, and by claiming that the Greek elements of the Diaspora Judaisms were only a
thin Greek veneer.58 A few of the upper-class Jews might have taken it upon themselves to attempt
to join Greek society, but they did not represent the masses of the people. Taking Feldmans
arguments to their logical conclusion, for Jews in the Hellenistic world, cultural engagement with the
Greeks was dangerous and could potentially lead to the denial of the Jewish God and the apostasy of
the people.
Lester Grabbe recognizes Feldmans contribution to the discussion by cast(ing) doubt on the
speed with which Judaism was Hellenizedhowever, he ultimately finds Feldmans arguments
lacking.59 For all his assertions about Jewish immunity to Greek influence, Feldman does not provide
positive proof that the Jews maintained consistent countermeasures to Hellenization.60 Most
problematically, Grabbe writes, Feldman seems to make a strong, underlying assumption that being
Hellenized means ceasing to be a proper Jew.61 There is no indication that this is the case, and the
examples of Ezekiel and Philo, among others, would seem to contradict the argument completely.
Tessa Rajak, while agreeing with Hengels main points, offers a slightly differentiated
understanding of Hellenization. According to Rajak, there are three main categories that ancient
Hellenizing tendencies fell into: The first is Hellenization as the suppression of a native culture and
language and its replacement with a fully or mainly Greek style.62 The second is a mixed, hybrid
form of Hellenism; and the third is the addition of Greek elements to a persisting culture whose
leading features remained visible and relatively constant, which is the category into which Rajak
would place the Jews.63 Lester Grabbe argues along the same lines, but makes more of a
differentiation between different types of Hellenization, which for his work, represents a spectrum
encompassing many shades of Greek influence, from the limited to the intense.64 The distinction
which some scholars make between Judaism and Hellenism is, in fact, an artificial binary.65
However, Grabbe points out that while the Jews may have become culturally Hellenized, they refused
to compromise in the area of religion, with very few exceptions.66 It seems that however much the
Diaspora community wanted to be involved with the surrounding culture, the worship of foreign gods
was never widely spread.
58 Feldman, Jew and Gentile, 43, 51. 59 Lester Grabbe, Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian, Vol. 1 (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1992),
152. 60 Grabbe, Judaism, 152. 61 Grabbe, Judaism, 151. 62 Tessa Rajak, The Hasmoneans and the Uses of Hellenism, in A Tribute to Geza Vermes: Essays on Jewish and Christian Literature and History, ed. Philip R. Davis and Richard T. White (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic
Press, 1990), 265. 63 Rajak, The Hasmoneans, 265. 64 Grabbe, Judaism, 168. 65 Grabbe, Judaism, 169. 66 Grabbe, Judaism, 170.
20
Another scholar who provides an extremely thorough discussion of what exactly is meant by
the term Hellenism is John Barclay.67 According to Barclay, by Hellenism we mean the common
urban culture in the eastern Mediterranean, founded on the Greek languagetypically expressed in
certain political and educational institutions and largely maintained by the social lite.68
Hellenization, therefore, was the cultural engagement with Hellenism.69 This cultural
engagement spread from the Diaspora to Palestine, with varying degrees of what may be considered a
successful adaptation of the various Greek forms, largely dependent on whether it was found in the
city or the countryside.
This is not to suggest that the Jewish communities were isolated enclaves which completely
rejected the surrounding Greek culture (cf. Feldman). Much of the early scholarship in this field
encouraged such a view, unfortunately, and portrayed Hellenism as the great confronting culture
which arose in the fourth century BCE.70 However, many scholars have questioned the Judaism
versus Hellenism myth, and Anita Norichs statement that Jewish culture has always developed
alongside and inside a wider, non-Jewish world can be taken as a fair summary of much scholarship
today.71 This development within and alongside the Greek world does not mean that the Jewish
communities did not maintain some sort of key Jewish identity. In Fredrik Barths book on the
boundaries between ethnic groups, he points out that:
it is clear that boundaries persist despite a flow of personnel across them. In other words,
categorical ethnic distinctions do not depend on an absence of mobility, contact and
information, but do entail social processes of exclusion and incorporation whereby discrete
categories are maintained despite changin4g participation and membership in the course of
individual life histories.72
The question is now what this identity consisted of and whether it is fruitful to search for a certain
essence of Judaism which could have been agreed upon by all Jews of the time and used as a base
from which to build the various Judaisms. As Norich points out, the more one studies the complexities
of family, self, assimilation, and identity the more complex the meaning of Jewish culture
becomes.73 Philip Alexander has suggested that rather than thinking of a Jewish culture which is set
67 John Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora: From Alexander to Trajan (Edinburgh: T & T Clark
Ltd.,1996), 82-102. 68 Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 88. 69 Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 88. 70 Jonathan Goldstein, Jewish Acceptance and Rejection of Hellenism, in Jewish and Christian Self-
Definition: Volume Two, Aspects of Judaism in the Graeco-Roman Period, ed. E. P. Sanders, A. I. Baumgarten
and Alan Mendelson (London: SCM Press Ltd., 1981), 64-87. 71 Anita Norich, Introduction, in Jewish Literatures and Cultures: Context and Intertext, ed. Anita Norich and Yaron Z. Eliav (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008), 1. 72 Fredrik Barth, Introduction, in Ethnic Groups and Boundaries: The Social Organization of Culture Difference, dd. Fredrik Barth (Bergon-Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1969), 9-10. 73 Barth, Introduction, 3-4.
21
in opposition to a Greek culture, rather we should think of a broadly uniform culture pervading the
whole region, within which various groups adapted the dominant cultural patterns and structures in
order to create subcultures and establish ethnic identities.74
With this in mind, it may be useful to consider the different aspects of Hellenism that scholars
have identified. John Barclay lists seven key areas of Hellenism (political, social, linguistic,
educational, ideological, religious, and material) with which the Jew in the ancient world was
expected to engage.75 In each of these areas the main question is how much a Jew accepted or
participated in them. Barclay points out that it is helpful to distinguish between different kinds and
between different degrees of Hellenization, and goes on to discuss how these kinds and degrees may
be grouped according to the processes of assimilation, acculturation, and accommodation.76 To put it
briefly, assimilation is social integration (becoming similar to ones neighbours); acculturation
involves the application of the linguistic, educational and ideological aspects of a given cultural
matrix; and accommodation is the use to which acculturation is put, in particular the degree to
which Jewish and Hellenistic cultural traditions are merged, or alternatively, polarized.77 Barclay
uses a series of graphs based on each of these three aspects of Hellenization to demonstrate that in
each of these areas it was possible for a Jew in the Hellenistic world to be anywhere on the spectrum,
from fully embracing Hellenization to utterly rejecting it. The case of the Jews in Hellenistic Egypt,
for example, is thus much more complicated than a simply us versus them mentality. A Jew could
conceivably use the Greek language, give his children a Greek education, and conduct trade with
Greek citizens all while keeping the Sabbath and being an active part of the Jewish community.
During this brief survey of the scholarship on Hellenism we have considered the extremes of
potential interaction between the Jews in both the Diaspora and Palestine and the dominant Greek
culture. Of the secondary literature surveyed, the definition of Hellenism used in this thesis will stick
closest to that given by Hengel and Barclay. Without making use of Barclays three As or Hengels
paradigmatic early and tenaciously, Hellenization here will be used in the sense of the Greek
influence on the non-Greek peoples, who adopted certain practices and ways of living, consciously or
unconsciously, and combined them with their own traditions. This process did start very early, with
the Persians, and affected a large proportion of the society, and the extent of Hellenization could
cover a wide spectrum.
74 Aleander, Philip, Hellenism and Hellenization as Problematic Historiographical Categories, in Paul Beyond the Judaism/Hellenism Divide, ed. Troels Engberg-Pedersen (Lousiville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001),
70. 75 Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 89-90. 76 Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 90. Italics included by Barclay. Goldstein postulates a similar
list of characteristics, including interaction with Greeks, use of the Greek language, the spread of rational
philosophies, epic and dramatic poetry, an emphasis on athletics and education, and the enduring legacy of
gymnasia and other typically Greek architectural achievements. Goldstein, Jewish Acceptance and Rejection of Hellenism, 67. 77 Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 92-96. Italics included by Barclay.
22
3.1 Jewish Identity
Within the wider discussion of the extent of Hellenization is the question of Jewish identity.
There were several distinguishing features of belief and practice which marked those who followed
the God of the Hebrew Scriptures from those who did not, but what were they exactly?78 A set of
recognized texts had been, Collins summarizes, providing a common basis for postexilic Judaism
since the time of Ezra.79 However, the scriptures were open then, as they were later, to differing
literal and allegorical interpretations.80 Some of the physical markers, such as circumcision and the
abstention from certain foods, were well known. Besides these basic elements of belief and practice,
however, there was room for various interpretations and forms. As Collins says, [t]he Torah was the
basic component in the tradition and those who would remain within Judaism had to relate themselves
to it in some way.81 Differing understandings could be influenced by social class and political
allegiance, as well as by personal preferences and aspirations.
In the fourth century BCE, initial Greek contact with the Jews left the discoverers with the
impression that the Jews were a nation of philosophers.82 At the time the Greeks were interested in
ethnographies, and so, as Momigliano puts it, the Jews were asked to perpetuate their own myth in
the terms in which the Greeks had invented it. Some Jews obliged.83 In one of the late accounts
produced in this way, Moses is the teacher of Orpheus and creator of the Egyptian animal cults; in
another, Ptolemy II Philadelphus himself recognizes the worth of the Hebrew scriptures and
commissions a Greek copy for the library in Alexandria.84 However, by the time these accounts were
written, the relationship between the Jews and the surrounding cultures was beginning to decline
(hence the possibility that these texts were created with apologetic purposes in mind). Eventually,
relations between Jews and non-Jews deteriorated and, unsurprisingly, counter-claims began to
emerge. The writings of Manetho contradict the Jewish stories of divine deliverance from Egypt with
claims that the Jews were not only to be associated with the invading Hyksos from Egyptian legend,
78 Collins suggests that the most striking thing about the Jewish encounter with Hellenism, both in the Diaspora and in the land of Israel, was the persistence of Jewish separatism in matters of worship and cult. There was a
limit to Hellenization, which is best expressed in the distinction between cult and culture. John J. Collins, Jewish Cult and Hellenistic Culture (Leiden: Brill, 2005), 43. 79 John J. Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem: Jewish Identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora (New York:
Crossroad Publishing Company, 1983), 12. 80 See the allegorical interpretations of Philo, for example his interpretation of the Genesis creation account in
De opificio mundi. Philo of Alexandria. On the Creation of the Cosmos according to Moses, trans. David Runia
(Leiden: Brill, 2001). 81 Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem, 15. 82 Arnaldo Momigliano, Alien Wisdom: The Limits of Hellenization (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1975), 86. This idea originally comes from Theophrastus, in his work On Piety, who was one of Aristotles pupils. We do not have the original work attributed to Theophrastus, but fragments appear in Porphyrys On Abstinence. See Walter Ptscher, Theophrastos, ( Leiden: Brill, 1964). 83 Momigliano, Alien Wisdom, 92. 84 Artapanus and the Letter of Aristeas, respectively, both from the second century BCE. For a discussion of
Greek authors who wrote about the Jews, and the dates at which these authors wrote, see M Stern and Oswyn
Murray, Hecataeus of Abdera and Theophrastus on Jews and Egyptians, in The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, Vol. 59 (1973), 159-168.
23
but were also driven out of Egypt for being a colony of lepers.85 Eventually, accusations of ritual
murder, temple worship of a donkeys head, and accusations of an anti-Greek attitude began to
circulate.86
While scholars, such as Aleander above, have argued that there was a common culture across
the region, others have argued that there was still a certain amount of cultural dissonance encounter by
Hellenized Jews. According to Collins, this dissonance expressed itself in two areas in particular: first,
the negative assessment of Jewish origins and traditions given by Hellenized authors which did not
match the dominant Jewish tradition; second, the Jewish tradition which discouraged mingling with
the nations, which for Hellenized Jews was not just desirable, but necessary.87 There were various
ways to address the confusion and uncertainty raised by contradictions to Jewish traditions, but
Collins focuses on two in particular: the Jews could either refute the Hellenistic view of Judaism
(apologetics), or highlight the aspects of Judaism which Greeks would be most friendly towards
(philosophical aspects).88 Hellenized Jews occupied a space somewhere in the middle of the Jewish-
Hellenistic spectrum. They still wished to express themselves as religious Jews and they wanted to
continue to interact with and live in the Greek world. As Collins points out, [t]he expression of
traditional Jewish material in Hellenistic forms, such as tragedy and epic, again blurs the differences
between the two traditions and serves to show that Judaism is not an alien body in the Hellenistic
world.89 The Exagoge is not an apologetic text, but it does serve as an example of what can be done
by a Jew who is immersed in the Greek literary and cultural tradition.
The concern to discover a normative Judaism against which to compare all of the various
Diaspora and Palestinian communities has proved troublesome over the years.90 Older scholarship
used words like normative, classical, and native JudaismAs Barclay points out, this implies
that the purest Judaism was what was dominant in Palestine, and this was equated with later
Pharisaic and Rabbinic Judaisms.91 These words all assumed that the norm was understood in
exactly the same way, from Jerusalem to Alexandria, and conformity to this norm was somehow
enforced by the Jewish leadership. However, there is little evidence that such a universally accepted
Judaism was prevalent during the time of the Second Temple.92 While there were some commonalities
85 Momigliano, Alien Wisdom, 93. 86 Momigliano, Alien Wisdom, 93. 87 Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem, 8. 88 Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem, 9. 89 Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem, 9. 90 See Gabriele Boccaccini, Roots of Rabbinic Judaism: An Intellectual History, from Ezekiel to Daniel (Grand
Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2002), 8-14 for a history of the discussion. 91 Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 83. 92 Philip Davies discusses the implications of using the word Judaism when discussing the early Jewish religion. He distinguishes between Juda-ism, which is the culture of Judea as an object of definition, and Judaism(s), in which Juda-ism develops into something more than (but also different from) the culture of Judea. Philip R. Davies, Scenes from the Early History of Judaism, in The Triumph of Elohim: From
24
shared by the Jews of the time, we must adjust for standards of measurement that were local,
contemporary, and commonly accepted.93 While it would be much easier to label every text which
seems slightly surprising or difficult as deviant, we are not in the position to make such judgments.
In this vein, Lee Levine writes that:
when speaking of a common Judaism one must admit that, with few exceptions, it is very
difficult both to quantify this perception (how many Jews or what percentage of Jews
observed a given practice), or to assess to what extent the observance of a specific practice
(e.g., Sabbath laws) was identical or even similar among all Jews.94
There were certain commonalities, but it is extremely difficult to measure their reach and
enforcement. The main question is whether the literature which has come down to us reflects the
practice of the masses of ordinary Jews in the Hellenistic world. As noted above, Collins has
emphasized the importance of the canon in constructing Jewish identity. However, he is swift to
clarify that the Hebrew Scriptures did not provide a definite norm in the sense of prescribing a single
orthodox way of being Jewish.95 However, as we have seen, there was no monolithic set of customs,
untouched by any foreign influence.96 When dealing with a remote period in the development of the
Jewish religion, it is easy to fall prey to the assumption that what passed for orthodox or
normative in a later period could be applied to the entire history of Judaism. During the Hellenistic
era we catch a glimpse of the development of several different Judaisms, and can see how certain
trends, which will be important later on, begin and are either ignored or adopted by the different
groups. This study will follow Boccacinis general claim that it is most appropriate to describe
Judaism historically as the set of monotheistic belief systems associated with the diety named
YHWH.97
In a discussion of the various kinds of Second Temple Judaisms, we inevitably encounter the
question of whether it was possible for a Jew to become completely cut off from his communityto
become apostate. Lack of observance might have been a larger problem for the Jewish community,
because to actually cut oneself off completely from the community was in itself a difficult task.98 It
required that the individual withdraw from the Jewish community, abandon the outward signs of
religious observance, and actively worship other gods. The most likely motivating factor behind such
Yahwisms to Judaisms, ed. Diana Vikander Edelman (Kampen: Kok Pharos Publishing House, 1995), 153. It is
only once we look at Judaism within its cultural development that we can begin properly to understand it. 93 Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora, 85. 94 Lee Levine, Jewish Identities in Antiquity: An Introductory Essay, in Jewish Identities in Antiquity, ed. Lee I. Levine and Daniel R. Schwartz (Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009), 29. 95 Levine, Jewish Identities in Antiquity, 12. 96 Boccaccini, Hellenistic Judaism, 57. 97 Boccaccini, Roots of Rabbinic Judaism, 35-36. 98 Louis Feldman and Meyer Reinhold, eds, Jewish Life and Thought among Greeks and Romans: Primary
Readings (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996), 56.
25
behavior would be professional aspirations, and we know of at least one Jew, Philo of Alexandrias
nephew Tiberius Julius Alexander, who supposedly did just that.99 However, caution must be
exercised when declaring this or that individual apostate. Jason the High Priest is another example of
a Jew who was said to be Hellenized to the point of apostasy, however, as Grabbe so rightly points
out, [t]hat some Jews may have judged him an apostate is irrelevant to his self-designation or his
own Jewish identity.100 In most cases we do not have enough information or are relying upon
secondary accounts about what the author considers to be behavior which would place an individual
outside of the Jewish community.
There were, of course, groups which resisted Greek domination, the most famous perhaps the
armed revolt led by the Maccabees from 167-160 BCE against the Seleucid Empire (which had
control of Palestine at the time).101 Military resistance was not unique to the JewsGrabbe points out
that such resistance regularly occurred to subjugated people, as the most obvious form of resistance
was armed rebellion against Greek political domination and the attempt to restore native rule.102 In
the case of the Maccabean revolt, the conflict started when the Greek ruler, Antiochus Epiphanes,
took drastic measures to prevent the Jews from practicing their religion. He prohibited the observance
of the Sabbath and the food laws, the practice of circumcision, and even offering sacrifices to the
Jewish God in the Jerusalem temple. According to 1 Maccabees 1.41-43, [t]he King wrote to his
whole kingdom that all should be one people, and that all should give up their particular customs. All
the Gentiles accepted the command of the king, however, compliance was no so readily forthcoming
from all of Israel.103 Antiochus decree that all Jews offer sacrifices to Greek gods was the final
straw: The priest Mattathias, after killing a Jew who attempted to comply with the kings demands for
sacrifice, began an armed rebellion against the Greek rulers. With the cry [l]et every one who is
zealous for the law and supports the covenant come with me! the group that later became known as
the Maccabees began their military resistance.104 According to the traditional narrative, after a
successful campaign, the Jewish nation enjoyed a brief period of political autonomy, although the
fight for political power was ongoing. Eventually the Roman army forced the Jewish people to
surrender the self-rule secured by the guerrilla resistance movement, although the drive for freedom
was to assert itself (in much less successful forms) several more times in the course of the next few
99 For a sympathetic analysis of Tiberius Julius Alexander, see Mlze-Modrzejewski, The Jews of Egypt, 185-
190. 100 Grabbe, Judaism, 170. 101 This conflict is described in I Maccabees. See 1 Maccabees, trans. John Bartlett (Sheffield: Sheffield
Academic Press, 1998). See also Jan Willem van Henten, The Maccabean Martyrs as Saviours of the Jewish
People (Leiden: Brill, 1997). The chapter Dying for the Jewish People in particular is relevant as it discusses the relationship between the revolt and the concern to maintain a Jewish way of life: van Henten, The Maccabean Martyrs, 187-269. 102 Grabbe, Judaism, 163. 103 1 Maccabees 1.41-43 in The New Oxford Annotated Apocrypha, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1989) 204-205. 104 1 Maccabees 1.41-43 in The New Oxford Annotated Apocrypha, 204-205.
26
hundred years. While the conflict began because of ostensibly religious reasons, Menachem Mor
notes that it continued as a national battle against a foreign oppressor, and ended as a war againt the
different elements living in Eretz-Israel.105
Philip Aleander notes that [i]n antiquity Jewish opposition to things Greek manifested itself
on a comparatively narrow front, mainly in opposition to Greek political domination, the idolatry
of Greek popular religion, and certain Greek mores.106 Beyond that, however, Jews generally
interacted and embraced the common Hellenistic culture of which they were a part. However, as we
have seen, even though Hellenism was an all-pervasive force in the ancient world, it could be resisted,
to a certain extent. Although this resistance did not take the traditionally understood
Jerusalem/Diaspora, or Jewish/Hellenistic forms, it was largely religious in motivation and content.
The Maccabees took a more physical approach to resistance and achieved more spectacular results,
but these ultimately their efforts did not achieve permanent change. Among the groups which resisted
Hellenism, the ones which were able to address ideological and religious concerns had the most
success. Momigliano considers apocalypticism, which spawned isolated communities completely cut
off from the Greek world, and Pharisaism the two main forces countering Hellenization.107 As he
writes, Whether one turned to apocalyptic seers or to human rabbis (two groups which, we
emphasize again, were not easily separable), it was a different world from that of the neighbouring
Gentiles.108 Hellenization then, for all its influence, could be successfully resisted. However, such
resistance must not be confused with faithful religious observance. A Jew in the Hellenistic world
could actively engage with and participate in the surrounding culture without compromising his
faithfulness to the Jewish God or his Jewish identity.
4. Hellenistic-Jewish Literature
Before moving on to the discussion of the translation of the Septuagint, we will note a few
points about Hellenistic-Jewish literature in general. When we discuss the literary output of
Hellenistic Jews, we must keep in mind that what has survived to our own time does not represent the
extent of the various understandings of Jewish identity during the period in which these texts were
written.109 E. P. Sanders points out that,
A collection of literary remains represents one of the special interests of an individual or a
group; but we should not suppose that each collection corresponds to an isolated group of
105 Mor, Menachem, The Persian, Hellenistic and Hasmonean Period, in The Samaritans, ed. Alan Dr. Crown (Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1989), 15. 106 Alexander, Hellenism and Hellenization, 66. 107 Momigliano, Greek Culture and the Jews, 338-340. 108 Momigliano, Greek Culture and the Jews, 340. 109 See E. P. Sanders, Judaism: Practice and Belief. 63 BCE 66 CE (London: SCM Press, 1992), 9.
27
people who had no other ideas and who would have denounced other literary collections as
belonging to a different Judaism, or would have found them incomprehensible.110
Although different groups may have organized themselves around a certain body of literature (like the
Essenes), the ideas in apologetic, apocalyptic, and romantic literature, to name just a few examples,
would have circulated beyond their original audience. As we will discuss later, the boundaries
between certain schools of thought, like the boundaries between literary genres, can be at times
extremely flexible.111
Hellenistic-Jewish literature was flourishing in the centuries surrounding the composition of
the Exagoge. Fraser divides the surviving Hellenistic-Jewish literature into various categories
including apocryphal and semi-canonical, secular historical writing, and apologetic.112 At this
juncture, a valid objection may be raised about the seemingly overly-ambitious grouping of such
disparate texts together under the heading of Hellenistic Jewish Literature. Such a category could be
used to smooth over the differences between a text such as Ben Siras, for example, which is generally
classified as wisdom literature, and the Letter of Aristeas, which is traditionally labeled as an
apologetic text. It is indeed important that the distinctiveness of each text be preserved and not be
erased for the sake of presenting a united (and thus easily grouped) front of texts. However, it is
imperative that we not confuse genres and conflate time periods, while recognizing that the divisions
between genres and time periods are often the result of years of interpretation, and often oversimplify
the complex interaction between texts. While certain factors may vary, one remains the same: the
Hellenistic milieu in which the Jews in Jerusalem and the Diaspora created their work. The meaning
and degree of interrelatedness of each of these texts can be explored in light of this overarching
context.
4.1 The Septuagint
For a text that has had such lasting significance in both the Jewish and Christian traditions,
there is a frustrating dearth of concrete evidence about when, why, and who first translated the
Hebrew Scriptures into Greek. There are, of course, many theories that seek to answer these
questions, building on what can be gleaned from the Letter of Aristeas and other ancient sources. We
will explore a few of these theories in this section, including what scholars have to say about the
purpose of the translation, the techniques used to make it, and the Hebrew character of the finished
product.
110 Sanders, Judaism: Practice and Belief, 9. 111 Sanders gives an example of this as it relates to apocalyptic texts: Thus in dealing with religious practice, I think that I am also dealing with apocalyptists, who, in my view, did not form separate conventicles and spend all their time contemplating the heavenly secrets. Sanders, Judaism: Practice and Belief, 9. As we deal with the text of the Exagoge as potentially informed by mystical influences, we must not assume that this category is one that is absolutely contained within itself. 112 Fraser. PA, 687.
28
The Letter of Aristeas is still our main source of information about the translation of the
Hebrew scriptures into Greek. Many scholars writing on the subject have concluded, along with
Benjamin Wright, that the Letter is a foundational myth of origins for the Septuagints transformed
position/function as an independent, scriptural authority.113 Although the version of events given in
the text were accepted by its original Jewish audience, and later by the Church Fathers, the letter fell
out of favor once biblical scholars began to consider not just the books of the Bible, but the extra-
canonical writings as well, in a textual critical manner. The claim in the Letter that Ptolemy
Philadelphus was somehow responsible for the work of translation was dismissed as false, and the
texts was relegated to the category of propaganda, more romance than history, as Gooding
describes the situation.114 However, Sylvie Honigman has pointed to a new trend in scholarship
towards accepting what the Book of Aristeas (the name which she prefers to use) has to say about
Ptolemaic involvement in the translation of the Septuagint.115 Interpreters accept that the project was
initiated by Ptolemy, but deny that it was for the royal library in Alexandria, while others accept the
entire account.116 Tessa Rajak is another scholar who argues that [e]choes of history reverberate in
the myth.117 She notes in particular that [s]ide-stepping the fact-fiction dichotomy and approaching
the story as historical myth, open to comparison with other reflections of the same period, will also
expose some less-noticed elements embedded in the narrative.118 As the account is all that we have at
the moment, it would be better to not entirely ignore the letter when discussing the origins of the
Septuagint.119
The term Septuagint will be used in this section to refer to the original translation of the
Pentateuch. In the Letter of Aristeas, it seems likely that the project undertaken by the Seventy was
the translation of the first five books of the later Hebrew canon. The rest of the translation work was
undertaken by private hand, as Bickerman puts it, or scribes unrelated to the original project.120 Of
course, the prologue to Ben Sira mentions that [m]any great teachings have been given to us through
113 Benjamin G. Wright III, Translation as Scripture: The Septuagint in Aristeas and Philo, in Septuagint Research: Issues and Challenges in the Study of the Greek Jewish Scripture, eds. Wolfgang Kraus and R. Glenn
Wooden (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2006), 54. 114 D. W. Gooding, Aristeas and Septuagint Origins: A Review of Recent Studies, in Vetus Testamentum, Vol. 13, Fasc. 4 (1963), 357. 115 Sylvie Honigman, The Septuagint and Homeric Scholarship in Alexandria (London: Routledge, 2003).
Honigman makes the point that the Letter of Aristeas is not actually a letter, but a diegesisthe author actually uses the term in his writing, and it simply indicates a prose account. Honigman, The Septuagint, 1. 116 Honigman, The Septuagint, 4. 117 Tessa Rajak, Translation and Survival: The Greek Bible of the Ancient Jewish Diaspora (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2009), 28. 118 Rajak, Translation and Survival, 28. 119 Nina Collins argues extensively for the historicity of the letter, especially its claim that the translation was
originally commissioned by the Greeks and supervised by Demetrius. Nina Collins, The Library in Aleandria
and the Bible in Greek (Leiden: Brill, 2000). 120 Elias J. Bickerman, The Septuagint as a Translation, in Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research, Vol. 28 (1959), 6.
29
the Law and the Prophets and the others that followed them, which could be taken to mean that by
that time most of the texts recognized as authoritative had been translated into Greek.121
Benjamin Wright argues that [i]n its beginnings the Septuagint was intended to serve as a
point of entry to the Hebrew, a way of bringing the original to the readerthe Hebrew version of the
texts is still the focus for the translators, but they recognize that their audience is no longer familiar
with their ancestral language.122 However, over the course of the centuries this Greek translation came
to replace the Hebrew as authoritative for the Jewish community in Alexandria. Wright concludes that
from the very inception of the project, the Septuagint was meant to be an independent authority
(bolstered by Aristeas myth of origins) which was never intended to relate to the Hebrew in the first
place.123 He finds support for this claim in the tradition contained in the Letter of Aristeas that the
Ptolemaic ruler was behind the project.124 If Ptolemy was interested in the project, the reasoning goes,
he would be invested in the final Greek translation, and not the Hebrew originals.
However, when we look at the text of the Septuagint, we can easily see the marks of Hebrew
grammar and language on the text. In the words of Henry Gehman, while the Septuagint strives to be
good Greek, it has a heavily Hebraic character.125 Gehman notes the influence of Hebrew
throughout the Septuagint, but concludes that it is more prevalent in the latter books of the LXX.126
However, Gehman writes, A Semitic psychology permeates the Greek of Genesis, and Greek
prepositions, pronouns and syntax have received a Hebrew connotation.127 This Hebrew connotation
does not mean that there was a Jewish-Greek jargon, but that there was a Jewish-Greek used in
synagogues and religious circles.128 Bickerman notes that the language found in the Septuagint would
not have been limited to use in the synagogue and the wider Jewish community, but also within the
wider Greek-speaking world.129 The translators of the Septuagint were using certain grammatical
forms and turns of phrase which might not have been absolutely perfect Greek, but they did reflect the
vernacular of the time.
Of course, Hebrew does have a certain amount of influence on the words and sentence
structure of the Septuagint. Marcos prefers to speak of it as translation Greek, since although not
all the writings included are strictly translations, they arose conditioned by the bilingualism of their
121 Ben Sira, prologue. The New Oxford Anootated Apocrypha, 58. 122 Wright, Translation as Scripture, 54. 123 Wright, Translation as Scripture, 54. 124 Wright, Translation as Scripture, 54. 125 Henry S. Gehman, Hebraisms of the Old Greek Version of Genesis, in Vetus Testamentum, Vol. 3, Fasc. 2 (1953), 141. 126 Gehman, Hebraisms, 141. 127 Gehman, Hebraisms, 148. 128 Henry S. Gehman, The Hebraic Character of Septuagint Greek, in Vetus Testamentum, Vol. 1, Fasc. 2 (1951), 81. 129 Bickerman, The Septuagint as a Translation, 12.
30
authors or are influenced to a different extent by a translation language, the language of the LXX.130
This bilingualism is responsible both for the syntactic peculiarities of the Greek of the Old and New
Testaments, and of the pap