The Armenian Philo on the Feast of Passover

chapter 5 The Armenian Philo on the Feast of Passover

Predrag Bukovec

Philo of Alexandria (ca. 15BC–40AD) can be regarded as one of the primary authorities for reconstructing Early Judaism in the Second Temple period. Increasingly, students of New Testament exegesis recognise him as an impor- tant source for understanding the fundamental scriptures of Christianity which emerged in the first century AD from among a group of followers of Jesus of Nazareth within contemporary Judaism. Philo, an intellectual and expert in the Jewish tradition as well as in Hellenistic philosophy, is an example of the constant challenge of the Jewish diaspora to actualise their own heritage, crys- tallised in the authoritative scriptures of the Bible (especially its Greek translation, the Septuagint), in order to make it comprehensible not only for the non-Jewish majority in the Roman Empire, but also for those Jews who wished to be part of society without abandoning the religion of their fathers. How can one be a member of this specific and venerable tradition and at the same time live as a citizen in a polis like Alexandria? Next to other Early Jewish texts like 4Macc and the Jewish historiographers and Flavius Josephus, Philo took part in this “correlation problem”, sharing in the task of how to harmonise Jew- ish and Hellenistic identities without betraying the basic principles of one’s own ancient religion. One solution Philo proposed was an allegorical interpretation of the Bible in order to find the deeper meaning of the sometimes seemingly strange practices and narratives in Judaism; in this, the Alexandrian found a proper way to confront Greek philosophy with Jewish customs and beliefs in order to make it clear that being a Jew does not stand in contradic- tion to the common morals and metaphysics, but is an even better option for rendering them real. He had to explain Judaism for the majority and for Jews in the diaspora. In doing so, he is an awe-inspiring protagonist in a fascinating era. Philo’s approach to read biblical texts was influenced by the Alexan- drian exegesis of Greek classical works like Homer, which tried to make the great epicist readable and significant also for the élite that was well-trained in philosophical problems. To find “another” meaning in vexing passages about the Homeric anthropomorphic gods and goddesses was a central strategy for keeping Homer normative. This is precisely the cultural-social phenome- non which Jan and Aleida Assmann called “Sinnpflege” (the preservation of

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2020 | doi:10.1163/9789004397743_007 36 bukovec meaning).1 A canon of authoritative writings has to be interpreted anew in future generations, because the text itself remains unchanged. Like the narratives concerning the Trojan War and Ulysses’ wanderings, the Pentateuchal commandments and stories had to be re-understood. In this article, I analyse Philo’s interpretation of the Passover by consult- ing sources which are preserved only in Armenian. Philo’s extensive œuvre is written and transmitted mainly in Greek; some otherwise lost writings can be recovered in Armenian translation. The studies on Philo of Alexandria have focused thus far on the Greek corpus, whereas the Armenian translations have not yet been edited critically. In order to integrate Armenian sources into the study of Philo, this contribution starts with the information the author gives in his Quaestiones in Exodum (QE) about Passover. The second step is to correlate the results with the Greek Philo, before his own view on this Jewish feast will be linked to other concepts circulating in Early Judaism and the New Testament. These three steps can demonstrate Philo’s individual approach and answers to questions pertaining to the theology as well as the meaning of Passover in Early Judaism and Christianity.

1 Passover in the Quaestiones in Exodum

At present, a critical edition of the Armenian translation of Quaestiones in Genesim and Quaestiones in Exodum, two of the main2 writings3 of Philo of Alexandria,4 is still a desideratum.5 While this project is being accomplished

1 A. Assmann, J. Assmann, “Kanon und Zensur,” in Kanon und Zensur: Beiträge zur Archäologie der literarischen Kommunikation, eds. A. Assmann, J. Assmann (Munich: Fink, 1987): pp. 7–27. 2 But also QGarm and QEarm came down to us only fragmentarily. Probably more than a half of the original text remains lost, cf. E. Hilgert, “The Quaestiones: Texts and Translations,” in Both Literal and Allegorical: Studies in Philo of Alexandria’s Questions and Answers on Genesis and Exodus, ed. D.M. Hay (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1991): pp. 1–15, here p. 1. Cf. also G. Muradyan, “The Armenian Version of Philo Alexandrinus: Translation Technique, Biblical Citations,” in Studies on the Ancient Armenian Version of Philo’s Works, eds. S. Mancini Lombardi—P. Pon- tani (Leiden—Boston: Brill, 2011): pp. 51–85. 3 The next parallel to QG and QE are the contemporary commentaries on Homer, cf. M.R. Nie- hoff, Jewish Exegesis and Homeric Scholarship in Alexandria (Cambridge: Cambridge Univer- sity Press, 2011), p. 160. 4 Philo’s Quaestiones differ in many aspects from his other exegetical literature. According to Niehoff, Jewish Exegesis, p. 157 the Sitz im Leben can be classified as being addressed to edu- cated Jews in Alexandria who were well trained in the allegorical method and who expected a manual with distinct interpretations of the Pentateuch. 5 Cf. R. Marcus, “An Armenian-Greek Index to Philo’s Quaestiones and De Vita Contemplativa,”