Wisdom of Solomon in the Roman Empire

Wisdom of Solomon is the product of a Jewish sage, probably from Alexandria and living sometime between the 1^st century B.C.E and the mid 1^st century C.E.. The author, highly trained in rhetoric and familiar with Hellenistic philosophy, wrote a logos protreptikos, a sermon of exhortation, uniting Hellenistic literary features with creation theology and the redemption history of the ancestral traditions of Israel to convince his audience to maintain loyalty to their ancestral faith (293). Initially the Alexandrian Jews cultivated good relations with the roman authorities and local Egyptians, as the Jewish community was given autonomy in civil regulations and religious freedom, as they were allowed to organize as a politeuma, led by those holding the offices of the head of the gerousia, the head of the synagogue, and secretaries/scribes (294-295). Jews in the Hellenistic world were constantly under pressure to assimilate to the expanding Hellenistic culture, with various literature reflecting diverse approaches to the threat to Jewish identity, ranging from the hostile opposition of the Maccabees and apocalyptic literature, to the more assimilating posture of Wis. Sol., which merges eclectic ideas of Middle-Platonism with traditional Judaism in an attempt to show the compatibility of the two world-views. Although Jews were granted the freedom to observe the Sabbath and other religious holidays, exemption from the military, and collect tithes to send to Jerusalem, Jewish-Roman relations in Alexandria gradually deteriorated, as the perceived exclusivity of the Jews generated suspicion among their Gentile neighbors. There was also a history of anti-Judaism in Egypt, as reflected in the writings of Manetho, Chaeremon, Lysimachus, and later, Apion, who in various ways sought to discredit Jewish history in their writings (316-317). Particularly the history of the Jewish people in Egypt, the life of Moses and the Exodus, were re-written to oppose Israel’s traditions and put them in a negative light, most commonly representing the Exodus as the expulsion of a diseased people (319). The climax of the hostility was reached with the pogrom of Flaccus in 38 B.C.E., which was also the occasion that Perdue proposes Wis. Sol. was written as a response to (308). Wis. Sol. responds to the persecutions by offering an encouraging version of the Exodus and Israel’s interactions with Egypt, with personified Wisdom as the guiding principle of history, while making sure to portray the Egyptian ancestors as ignorant idolaters. The Jews of Alexandria are encouraged to endure and maintain their identity and religious distinction in the midst of persecution, with full expectations of immortality, as guaranteed by personified Wisdom, which functions in various roles as instrument of creation, redeemer, instructor, lover of humanity, and medium of immortality. Wisdom is portrayed as guiding history and acting as a consort of God in similar ways as Isis was paired with Serapis in Egyptian religion, to convince the audience that the God of Israel is in control and will vindicate his people, despite the prevailing circumstances suggesting the contrary (346).

The Development of Cities in Ancient Mesopotamia

Stone, Elizabeth C. “The Development of Cities in Ancient Mesopotamia,” 1:235-248.

Ancient Mesopotamia was essentially an urban civilization, whose political fortunes were reflected in the welfare of its cities. Cities functioned as centers of political administration, places of trade, and seats of deities. One of the major factors that led to the development of cities was the rise of temples. They also served as nexuses to mediate between pastoralists, fishers, and farmers as a place to exchange goods. At the dawn of Mesopotamian history, temples stood alone to regulate all aspects of society. The expansion of territorial boundaries led to disputes over resources and the need for military organization and cities to develop fortifications as secure habitations. The requirements of war also necessitated the development of military arts and leadership, which became an institution competing for power with the temple. The military leaders eventually become the political rulers in competition with the religious authorities. The tension between the royal and religious establishments is seen in the geography of excavated cities. In many locations the temple and palace are at opposite ends of the city, with neither one occupying a central location. The temples are usually located at the periphery of the site to communicate the symbolic distance separating the realms of gods and man, with the rest of the cities divided into districts with separate quarters for artisans, administrators, religious personnel, and military personnel.

Ben Sira in the Seleucid Empire

 Yeshua Ben Sira was a Jewish scribe and sage writing in the time of the Seleucid Empire to adapt his understanding of traditional Judaism with Hellenistic culture. Succumbing to Greek notions of individual authorship, Ben Sira provided his name to the work, becoming the first self-proclaimed author in Jewish literature. Ben Sira also applied discussions of several typical Greek themes and philosophical ideas: praise of virtuous heroes, friendship, self-control, rhetorical skill, satisfaction, etiquette and decorum, among other themes, provide close affinities with stoicism (258). Ben Sira recounts the glorious history of the heroes of Israel to highlight the antiquity of his people, which was a characteristic of superiority in the Hellenistic world. Also appealing to the Hellenistic world is the function of personified divine wisdom in creation and salvation and as permeating the cosmos, thus bearing similarities with the Stoic concept of logos.

            According to Perdue, Ben Sira wrote a schoolbook after the Greek model, in order to guide his students down a middle road between Judaism and Hellenism. Interestingly Ben Sira models his writing after the sayings of Proverbs and presents his teachings as equivalent to prophecy, which possibly suggests he expected his inspired interpretation of Torah to be accepted into the “canon” that was under discussion at his time (273):

24:33 I will again pour out teaching like prophecy, and leave it to all future generations

(NRSV)

Ben Sira thus marks the rise of scribes as inspired interpreters of scripture, who have the freedom to expand and adapt the words of the previous traditions to speak to new generations (282). Perdue proposes that the work contains a Sadducean outlook, which is betrayed by the absence of apocalyptic, lack of references to the oral traditions that were espoused by the Pharisees, the identification of wisdom with Torah, and his praise of the high priest (supposedly Simon II, who was favored by the Sadducees).

Ethnic Diversity in Ancient Egypt



Leahy, Anthony. “Ethnic Diversity in Ancient Egypt,” 1:225-234.

Although the literate elite minority in Ancient Egypt was concerned with presenting Egyptians as a people uniform in language, culture, religion, and ethnicity sharply distinct from its neighbors, such a perception can not be maintained. As pointed out by Leahy, in reality there was “incessant movement” of various ethnic groups and their cultures and beliefs in and out of Egypt throughout the pharaonic period (225). The causes of the rise of a unified Egyptian kingdom are difficult to locate. Around 3000 B.C. there is evidence of a unified language of semitic origin known as Egyptian that was the language of a kingdom that stretched from the Mediterranean to Elephantine/Aswan, ca. 500 miles south along the Nile. This nation now known as Egypt developed peculiar writing, art, architecture and culture. The Egyptian kingdoms were built on the domination and exploitation of the less-organized, nomadic peoples that surrounded them. In their own worldview and propaganda, Egypt was the center of the world, and the place favored by the gods to be the depository of divine order (ma’at). Beyond the bounds of Egypt was chaos, personified by the anarchic god Seth, who was associated with foreign nations (227). In Egyptian palaces these nations were depicted in paintings on the floors so that the king of Egypt would literally walk on them and thus they would be “under the king’s feet” (228). These idealistic perceptions of foreigners did not coincide with reality, as there is also evidence that Egyptians were open to utilizing foreigners for military purposes and as slaves. Egyptians preferred foreign mercenaries to fight their wars, and slaves to build their massive pyramids and temples. Close contact with these foreign groups led to intermarriages and ethnic mixing, and foreigners were integrated and accepted into Egyptian society. At several points in the history of Egypt, the country was ruled by foreigners, such as the Hyksos, the Libyans, and the Nubians. Curiously each of these peoples desired to portray their rulers as traditional Egyptian pharaohs (230-231). There was no formal definition of an Egyptian, or concept of citizenship, and it appears that the possibility of belonging to the nation of Egypt and adhering to their traditions was open to anyone willing to adopt the Egyptian way of life and religion. Particularly taking on a personal name expressing devotion to an Egyptian deity was a ticket to becoming Egyptian and gaining acceptance in society. Anyone taking on an Egyptian name was accepted, and had the possibility of accumulating wealth and upward social mobility (233). The unprejudiced openness of Egypt to absorbing different peoples was vital to its defense, infrastructural development, and duration of its culture as something foreigners were attracted to and willing to embrace (234).

Empire in Qohelet

Qohelet is the product of a wisdom tradition that emerges as a response to the traditional wisdom of the Jewish theocracy of the Persian period (198). The skepticism evident in Qohelet was part of a larger movement of protest against conventional traditions across the ANE, which was being overrun by Alexander the Great and Hellenism. Qohelet calls into question two traditional affirmations: retributive justice, and revelation through Torah and apocalyptic visions. In his pursuit of the answer to the perennial question of “what is good to humanity in living” (6:12) in a world where all is temporal and fleeting, Perdue posits the meaning “evanescence” to the key term hevel (203). In his understanding of the cosmos, Qohelet denies any causal nexus between deeds and consequences, which leads to denying that any order permeates reality. Perdue explores ANE parallel literature, pointing out autobiographical characteristics of Qohelet, which suggest the closest parallels are in Egyptian and Greek grave autobiographies and inscriptions (209). These parallels convey the importance of enjoying this present life while it is still possible for those fortunate enough to be alive and read the inscriptions. This is expressed by Qohelet in the Carpe Diem texts. The inscriptions lament the fact that the deceased did not have a chance to enjoy more of life, and express uncertainty that surrounds the afterlife, entreating the wise to take full advantage of the “portion” given to them in this life (218). Perdue bases his dating of Qohelet under the Ptolemaic empire (as opposed to the Persian, which is also a commonly held view), on linguistic and cultural reasons. The language is late biblical Hebrew, and contains several Persian words but also Greek expressions. According to Perdue the social context described in Qohelet supposes an oppressive and unjust hierarchical government (5:7-8), and economical developments of commerce, technology, the cultivation of estates, and high foreign taxation. Pointing out several similarities with Hellenistic paideia-teachers, Perdue estimates that Qohelet “would have been cosmopolitan in outlook, critical of traditional religion, wealthy, and quite probably a teacher of aristocratic youth in a private school that he operated…The worldly Zadokite priests, the cosmopolitan Hasidim, and the sectarian apocalyptic seers would have been his opponents, for he encountered their teachings with a skepticism that reflected some of the Greek and Egyptian thought of the period.” (232).

Animal Husbandry in the ANE

Hesse, Brian. “Animal Husbandry and the Human Diet in the Ancient Near East,” 1:203-222.

Contrary to popular belief, camels, which are often the icons of ANE animal husbandry, were not domesticated until late in antiquity. The most common animals domesticated, sheep, goats, and donkeys, had the ability to survive and adapt to varying circumstances, which made them optimal for traveling nomads. Along with technological advances that improved agricultural productivity and prolonged the lifespan of domestic animals, animal husbandry shifted from providing necessities to becoming an economic enterprise. This led to the rise of cattle management, which in most cases was taken over by a centralized bureaucracy. This centralization sought to maximize productivity by supplanting efforts of the domestic household in favor of government-run agricultural systems (205). Systematic management and the maximizing of resources allowed for the support of segments of society such as craftsmen, military, government, and priests, who were freed from activities of securing food to focus on specialized duties. These enterprises also led to unequal distribution of resources and resulted in the accumulation of wealth for the upper classes. The poor worked for the landowners for just enough food to survive, while the landowners prospered immensely. The religious use of domestic animals also played a factor in the rise of economic systems, as large quantities of specifically defined animals needed to be secured for the service of the gods. This also led to animals being used as taxation commodity. The centralized management was resisted by pastoral nomads, who understandably were hostile towards the localized systems (208). Although nomads had the potential to amass great wealth and consequent political power, it was also a risky business, as there was no security against disaster. There appears to have been quite a debate taking place in the ANE about which system of pastoral organization was the best, evidenced in texts like the Hebrew bible which give hints of the barriers between nomads and localized enterprises.

Resources on P

I am looking for articles/monographs/intros that would provide an up to date entry into the world of P, particularly on Leviticus and Ezekiel. If you have read anything exciting and important in these areas, please let me know!

Thanks.

Psalms in the Persian Empire

 The Psalms among the literature of the Hebrew Bible are perhaps the most difficult to locate in a particular context, especially those without superscriptions. Perdue proposes that the category of Wisdom Psalms are from the Persian period when the rise of scribal culture in Israel led to the collecting and editing of the 5 books into the 150-psalm psalter, into which scribes/sages inserted these Wisdom Psalms. Perdue identifies 5 categories of Wisdom Psalms (165):

             Torah (1, 19, 119)  Praise teaching of Torah as basis for ethics and sustaining of cosmos                                                           

            Instruction/Admonition (32, 34, 37) Teach hearers through rhetoric of admonition and prohibition wise, ethical                                                                                      conduct                                                                    

            Proverb/Saying (112, 127)   List of wisdom sayings based on observations of just and proper social order                                                           

            Reflective (49,73)            Reflect on theodicy, the suffering of the righteous and  prosperity of the wicked                                                     

            Creation (111)                        Orderly cosmos in which YHWH provides, Fear of YHWH as the beginning of wisdom

According to Perdue, these categories of Wisdom Psalms reflect the concerns of the Persian period. The issues of theodicy, creation, order, and ethical living were certainly perennial concerns of the liturgy of Israel, and can not be identified exclusively with certainty to the Persian period. A stronger case can perhaps be made for the rise of the status of Torah that is reflected in the Torah-psalms, which according to Perdue can be attributed to the codification of the priestly legal corpus that was taking place due to the Achaemenid policy to allow nations under their rule to shape their own laws for life under the empire (184). The rise of Torah was also taking place because the interpretation of Torah was replacing prophecy as the inspired and authoritative word of God to the community (182). In postexilic Yehud, without kings and diminishing prophets, Torah became identified with wisdom, and along with temple ritual, was the basis for sustaining creation and the life of the community (194-195).

Kalimi Ch. 8: Character Development

Ch. 8 Character Creation

In a literary creation like Chronicles, the development of characters plays a significant role in communicating the ideology of the work as a whole. Much has already been said about the development of the Kings David and Solomon in the narrative, but there are also other minor characters that can be shaped in a negative or positive light, betraying the authors personal attitude towards an individual or the role they occupy. The examples here show the C. positive regard for priests, and negative feelings towards foreign monarchs.

The priest Jehoida enjoyed a favorable disposition from the Chronicler. Such positive regard is conveyed by describing Jehoida with more specified and superlative descriptions, such as “ha rosh” (“the first, chief” 2 C. 24:6), as opposed to “ha cohen”   ( “the priest” 2K. 12:8). Also using the personal name Jehoida 2 C. 23:18//2 K. 11:18 as opposed to the generic title “ha cohen” draws attention to the personal character of Jehoida to make him more prominent, and also is typical of the Chroniclers more personal interest in the priesthood overall (171-174). Conversely, by tweaking the way characters are referred to, they can be rendered less significant in the narrative. The life of Joash King of Judah is closely tied to the life of Jehoida the priest. According to K., Joash did “what was upright in the eyes of YHWH all his days” (2 K. 12:3). C. divides the reign of Joash into two parts: the first was righteous, coinciding with the life of Jehoida who was his advisor (2 C. 24:2). After the death of Jehoida, Joash went downhill, as he abandoned YHWH and the temple and even killed Zechariah the son of Jehoida (2 C. 24:17-22). Consequently, C. turned against Joash to write him out of the story. This is done by removing the name Joash, or substituting the generic title “the king” for his name, to facilitate forgetting him.

            C. is also disinterested with foreign monarchs, and particularly Pharaoh Neco, who killed the Davidide Josiah and exiled his son Jehoahaz, violating the highly favored Davidic dynasty. Consequently the C. responds by omitting the title “Pharaoh” (2 K. 23:29//2 C. 35:20), or substituting the generic title “king”, or removing any royal title altogether in his descriptions of Neco, thus downplaying the role and power of the king (177-179).

The man כלבב YHWH

 The statement by Samuel justifying the dispossession of Saul as king in 1 Sam. 13:14 has for hundreds of years provided pastors with prime homiletical material. Samuel says to Saul: ”You have done foolishly. You have not kept the command of the LORD your God, with which he commanded you. For then the LORD would have established your kingdom over Israel forever. But now your kingdom shall not continue בקש יהוה לו איש כלבבו(Sam. 13:13-14)” 

The key phrase has often been translated “a man after YHWH’s own heart” to make the point that David, though flawed (particularly with reference to the Bathsheba incident), in his repentance and humility, is still the man who is  considered like-minded to YHWH and the one who most sincerely seeks YHWH, especially when compared to the depraved Saul. We should then imitate David’s character, as he reflects the heart of YHWH.

The term כלבב occurs also in Psalm 20:5 יתן-לך כלבבך וכל-עצתך ימלא

My translation: “May he give to you according to your heart (as your heart desires), and all your counsels fulfill”

and 1 Sam. 14:7 ויאמר לו נשא כליו עשה כל-אשר בלבבך נטה לך הנני עמך כלבבך

“And his armor-bearer said to him: Do all that is in your heart, and I will follow you.

Behold, I am with you, whatever your heart desires to do (like your heart)”

Based on these usages, בקש יהוה לו איש כלבבו could be translated:

“YHWH has sought a man according to his heart (=as he has chosen)”,

which is the way Kyle McCarter understands this in the Anchor Bible commentary.

This of course would not allow the text to be preached

as David reflecting the heart of YHWH.

I am curious as to the basis of the translation “after his own heart.”

Any thoughts on the translation?