23. Jewish Literature and the Second Sophistic

23. JewishLiteratureand the Second Sophistic The Jews sawthemselvesasapeople apart.The Bible affirmed it,and the nation’sexperience seemed to confirm it.AsGod proclaimed in the Book of Levi- ticus, “Youshall be holytome, for Ithe Lordamholy, and Ihaveset youapart from otherpeoples to be mine”.¹ The idea is echoed in Numbers: “There is apeo- ple that dwells apart,not reckoned among the nations.”² Other biblical passages reinforce the sense of achosen people, selectedbythe Lord(for both favorand punishment) and placed in acategory unto themselves.³ This notion of Jewish exceptionalism recurs with frequency in the Bible, most pointedlyperhaps in the construct of the return from the Babylonian Exile when the maintenance of endogamyloomed as paramount to assert the identity of the nation.⁴ The imagewas more than amatter of self-perception. Greeks and Romans also characterized Jews as holding themselvesaloof from other societies and keepingtotheirown kind.The earliest Greek writer who discussed Jews at anylength, Hecataeus of Abdera, described them (in an otherwise favorable ac- count) as somewhat xenophobic and misanthropic.⁵ That form of labelingper- sisted through the Hellenistic period and well into the eraofthe RomanEmpire. One need onlycite Tacitus and Juvenal for piercingcomments on the subject: Jews are fiercelyhostile to gentiles and spurn the companyofthe uncircumcised.⁶ Whatever the perceptions or the constructs, however,they did not match conditions on the ground. Jews dwelled in cities and nations all over the eastern Mediterranean, spilling over also to the west,particularlyinItaly and North Af- rica. The diasporapopulation far outnumbered the Palestinian, and the large majority of the dispersed grew up in lands of Greek languageand culture— and Roman political dominance.⁷ Isolation was not an option. Indeedthe Hellenic world of the Roman empire was part and parcel of the Jewishexperience,noaliensetting or foreign intrusion. It had been so for along time. Jewish intellectuals showed familiarity with and engagementinthe genres Lev. :. Num. :. eg.Gen. :–;Exod. :, :;Deut. :, :, :. Ezra, –;Neh. :–; :–, –. Hecataeus, apud Diod. Sic. ... Tac. Hist. ..–, ..;Juv. .–. John Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora: From Alexander to Trajan ( BCE– CE) (Edinburgh, ); E.S. Gruen, Diaspora:Jews amidst Greeksand Romans (Cambridge, Mass., ). 488 23. JewishLiterature and the Second Sophistic and forms of Greek literature from the later 3rd century BCE. Jewish writers com- posed tragic drama,epic poetry,history,philosophy, and even prose fictionin Greek with some frequency (far more thanweknow,since we have but afraction of it). By the time of the Second Sophistic, they weresteeped in Hellenic literary traditions, manyofthem probablyknew no languageother than Greek (the He- brew Bible had long since been translated into Greek), and they werefullycom- fortable with the intellectual horizons of the Hellenic Mediterranean. Did this produce strain and tension?Did workingwithin well established Greek literary conventionsinaworld under Roman swayrequirecompromise of Jewishprinciples and values that had an even longer history and amore com- pelling holdonthe consciousness of the Jews?Arevealing clue lies in the subject matter that pervades Jewishwritings in Greek of every form from the beginning. Epic, tragedy, history,and prose fiction did not celebrate the exploits of Zeus, Herakles, Odysseus,orAeneas. Their heroes were Abraham, Joseph, and Moses. The genres of classicalcultures wereput to use to retell in new shapes and guisesthe ancient tales on which Jews foundedtheir faith. TheHellenic mode served as ameansofexpression rather than an adoption of ideology. That does not,however fullyresolve the issue. The prideinisolation and dis- tinctiveness on the one hand and immersion in Hellenic culture on the other hardlymade for acozyfit.Tensions and strains must have existed as Jewish writers grappled with the amalgamofideas and formulations at the intersection of the cultures. The literary output constituted arich and diverse mix, and no brief survey can do it justice. Somesalient examples will have to suffice. Philo of Alexandria Philo of Alexandria stands out as the most prominent and conspicuous instance of the Jewish intelligentsia steepedinGreek learning.His output was vast,and his corpus (of which most,though not by anymeans all, survives) defies summa- ry.Heheld aposition of highesteem in the Jewish community of Alexandria in the period of the earlyRomanEmpire, living into the reign of Claudius.⁸ The di- versityand variety of his writingsreflect alifetime of learning of which onlya small hint can be givenhere.⁹ Philo was adevoted student and adherent of Daniel Schwartz, “Philo, his Family, and his Times.” In A. Kamesar,ed. TheCambridgeCom- panion to Philo (Cambridge, ), –. JennyMorris, “The Jewish Philosopher Philo.” In E. Schürer, TheHistoryofthe JewishPeople in the AgeofJesus Christ. Rev.and ed. by G. Vermes,F.Millar,and M. Goodman, vol. III.: – Philo of Alexandria 489 the Hebrew Bible in its Greek version (he knew little or no Hebrew), and he dedi- cated much of his energy to biblical exegesis. Interpretation of the Pentateuch, often elaborate allegoricalinterpretation, represented his principal métierand drovehis mission throughout.But he brought to that task awealth of erudition in Greek literature and, especially, Greek philosophy.¹⁰ Philo’sdeep engagement with Hellenic cultureisnobetter illustratedthan by his treatise, Quod Omnis Probus LiberSit (“Every Good Man is Free”). The work tackles afamiliar Stoic “paradox,” the proposition that the Stoic wise man alone is free, regardless of material condition, oppressed circumstances, or even servile status. Philo follows Stoic doctrine in insisting that freedom is aquality of mind or soul, an inward certitude of virtue,unaffected by anything external. Onlythe sageisrich, no matter how poverty-stricken, and onlyheis sovereign, no matter his fetters,brands of servitude, and enduring enslavement.¹¹ Genuine eleutheria comes from scorningthe claims of the pas- sions, resistingthe blandishments of wealth, reputation, and pleasure, and re- nouncinghuman frailties.The wise man is thus immune to the shifts of fortune and unaffected by avarice, jealousy, ambition, fear,orevenpain.¹² Philo assigns due credit to the fountainhead of Stoicism, Zeno, as the peerless practitioner of true virtue,evendefending his doctrines against critics and skeptics.Zenowas the preeminent advocate of living life in accord with nature.¹³ But Philo’sexpo- sition went beyond Stoicism. The sources he cites and the illustrations he em- ploys show awide acquaintancewith Hellenic history,literature,tradition, and mythology. Philo does not hesitate to appeal to Pythagorean teachings, to Plato, to other philosophers like Antisthenes, Anaxarchus,Zenothe Eleatic, and Diogenes, to Sophocles, and indeed to Homer.¹⁴ He makes referencetothe constitutions of Athens and Sparta, and to their lawgivers Solon and Lycurgus, he includes anecdotes about Alexander the Great,and he praises the sentiments and actions of the hero Herakles as conveyedbyEuripides.¹⁵ And he freelyem- ploys tales from Greek history,drama,and legend to reinforce his philosophical .(Edinburgh, )inparticular –;James Royse, “The Works of Philo.” In A. Kame- sar,ed. TheCambridgeComanion to Philo (Cambridge, ), –. H.A. Wolfson, Philo:Foundations of Religious Philosophy in Judaism, Christianity,and Islam, vols.(Cambridge,Mass.,): passim;John Dillon, TheMiddle Platonists:AStudy of Platon- ism, B.C. to A.D. (London, ): –;Maren Niehoff, Philo on JewishIdentity and Culture. (Tübingen, ): –. Philo, Prob., –, –. Philo, Prob., –. Philo, Prob., –, , , . Philo, Prob., , , , , , –, –, . Philo, Prob., , –, , –, . 490 23. JewishLiterature and the Second Sophistic propositions.¹⁶ All of this shows Philo comfortable,quite unselfconsciouslyso, in the cultureofthe Hellenes. Yetthe comfort level was incomplete. Reading between the lines shows that the cultivated philosopher did not altogether escape asense of tension in nego- tiating the relationship of his ancestral tradition to the intellectual world of Hel- las. Philo felt obliged to remind his readers thatthe lawgiver of the Jews went beyond the praise of inner virtue to celebrate loveofthe divine thatmakes the devout similar to gods among men.¹⁷ The passagefits ill in its context,almost an afterthought or an insertion, suggesting aneed to reassert foundational prin- ciples, however incongruous in the setting.And Philo goes further stilltopro- pose that Zeno himself drew on the Torahfor some of his precepts.¹⁸ That proposition was not novel. Earlier Jewish thinkers toohad advanced the idea that the best in Greek philosophywas prompted by the Bible—and none was deterred by the fact that the Greek translation was unavailable to Zeno or anyofhis predecessors.¹⁹ Philo cites Moses more than once for statements that supposedly anticipated the Stoics.²⁰ He occasionallytakes potshotsatGreek sophists, mere wordsmiths absorbed in logic-chopping and petty quibbling.²¹ And he identifies as the very embodiment of ascetic existenceand devotion to spiritual life the Jewishsect of the Essenes. They need no philosophical justification, onlythe piety that stems from adherencetothe laws of the fathers.²² The digression on the Essenes looks very much like an intrusion in the treatise, hardlyasmooth transition. Although (or perhaps because) this work is as thoroughlyHellenic as anyitem in Philo’slarge corpus, the author felt

Load more