Septuagint and Reception Essays prepared for the Association for the Study of the Septuagint in South Africa Edited by Johann Cook LEIDEN * BOSTON 2009Septuagint and Reception Essays prepared for the Association for the Study of the Septuagint in South Africa Edited by Johann Cook LEIDEN * BOSTON 2009f 1 WISDOM IN THE WISDOM OF SOLOMON AND CLEANTHES’ HYMN TO ZEUS Johan C, Thom University of Stellenbosch Any texts can be compared, hut not all comparisons are equally relevant or meaningful.’ When we compare texts, it is of crucial importance to know why we are doing so, because the rationale for the comparison is going to determine which aspects of the text or textual elements will be the focus of attention.” There may indeed be many different reasons for comparing two texts. The texts concerned may have obvious similarities in content that require explanation, for example, whether there is a genealogical relationship between the two texts, or whether the similarities are due to other factors. Texts may furthermore be compared to determine the characteristics of a particular form, genre, ar rhetorical strategy. A third reason may be to identify the religio-historical locus of a text in comparison to other texts, or to establish the probable cultural, religious, conceptual and other frames of reference of the first readers of a text In the case of the latter, further sclection criteria have to be applied as well, because any ancient text could conceivably contribute to our understanding of the social and cultural world of early Christianity. ' For further discussion of the problem of comparison, with a recent biblivgraphy, see Johan C, ‘Thom, “To Show the Difference by Comparison’: The New Weustein and Cleanthes’ Hymn,” in Reading Religions in the Ancient World: Essays Presented to Robert McQueen Grant on His 90th Birthday (ed. David E, Aune and Robin Darling Young; NovTSup 125; Leiden: Brill, 2007), 81-100. Cf. Jonathan Z, Smiths warning that any comparison is @ construction made by the scholar for his or her own reasons (Drudgery Divine: On the Comparison of Early Christianisies und the Religions of Late Antiquity (Jordan Lectures in Comparative Religion 14, CSIH; Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990}, 51, 118). some NT scholars, especially in Germany, increasingly use Umberto Eco’s concept of the ‘encyclopedia of the reader’ to indicate these frames of reference. See Umberto Eco, Lector in fabuila: La cooperazione interpretativa nei testi narrativi (Studi Bompiani 22; Milano: Bombiani, 1979); The Role of the Reader: Explorations in the Semiotics of Texts (Advances in Semiotics; Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1979). The concept ‘of ‘encyclopedia’ was first explained in Eco's 4 Theory of Semiotics (Advances in Semioties; Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1976), 98-100), 105-21 * CE. the criteria applied in the Newer Wertstein (Gerald Seelig, “Einfthrung,” in Texte ur Briefliteratur und zur Johannesapokalypse (ed. Georg Strecker and Udo Schnelle;196, Jowan C. THOM | In the case of the Wisdom of Solomon and Cleanthes’ Hymn to Zeus there are good reasons why a comparative reading would he appropriate and productive. There is gencral consensus that the Wisdom of Solomon shows clear signs af Stoic influence,’ while Cleanthes’ Iymn to Zeus is cone of the best representative texts of early Stoicism.® It is therefore not surprising that these two texts have important central topoi in common, such as the role of Reason (Logos) or Wisdom (Sophia) in structuring and maintaining the cosmic order, and the moral problem presented by people who do not recognise God’s providential care of the world. The two texts use comparable strategies to address these issues: both contain hymnic celebrations of the divine beings responsible for the world-order, as well as a protreptic element in which human beings are exhorted to recognise and obey the divine dispensation. In the analysis that follows I will concentrate on those elements the two texts have in common, and not attempt to give a detailed analysis of wisdom discourse as it functions in each of the two texts.” The aim of this analysis will } nevertheless be to contribute to our understanding of wisdom discourse in general by comparing the similarities and differences between the shared topoi and strategies in these two texts. 1, Cleanthes’ Hymn to Zeus Cleanthes of Assos (331/30-230/29 B.C.E.) followed Zeno of Citium to become the second head of the Stoa in Athens in 262/61. His Hymn to Vol.2.1 of Newer Wettstein: Texte zum Newen Testament aus Griechentum und Hellonismus; assisted by Gerald Seelig; Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1996), XIl- XIV); also Gerald Seelig, Religionsgeschichiliche Methode in Vergungenheit und Gegenwart: Studten zur Geschichte und Methudle des religionsgeschichtlichen Vergleicks in der newestamentlichen Wissenschaf (Atbeiten zur Bibel und ihrer Geschichte 7; Leipzig: Evanyelische Vetlagsaustalt, 2001), 312-13. In his review of the Neuer Wettscin, i Hians-Toset Klauck wains that comparison can potentially be endless (“Wettstein, alt und neu; Zur Neuausyabe eines Standardwerks,” BZ 41 [1997]: 94) See Taines M. Reese, Hellenistic Influence on the Book of Wisdom and Its Consequences (Rowse: Biblical Institute Press, 1970), passim; John J. Collins, “Natural Theology and Biblical Tradition: The Case of Hellenistic Judaism,” CBQ 60 (1998): 5-6. ® See also Reesc, Hellenistic Influence, 36. Reese refers to the Hymn to Zeus, but does rot make detailed use of the text. "1 will especially not discuss the las, historical section of the Wisdom of Solomon, although T agree with John Collins that “there is an underlying coherence to the book as a whole, It proposes an understanding of Wisdom and its role in the cosmos and in history, and draws inferences from this for human conduct” (Jewish Wisdom in she Hellenistic Age | {OTL; Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox, 1997), 182). | eeei as WisDoM OF SOLOMON AND CLEANTHES 197 Zeus is the only complete text of any length to survive from early Stoicism.* We know nothing about the circumstances of its composition or its function beyond what may be deduced from the Hymm itself. The : poem has been preserved by its inclusion in Stobacus’ Anthology, which i also provides the only definite ancient testimony to the Hymn. Scholars , have suggested that the Hymn to Zeus formed part of one of Cleanthes’ 5 other known works (c.g. regi Gediv), that it was an introduction to a , lecture series, or that it was written for use in the Stoa’s communal worship, but there is no definite evidence for any of these positions.” Its u prominent position in the opening chapter of Stobacus’ Anthology 5 (1.1.12 ed. Wachsmuth) probably indicates that it was still considered an , important philosophical school text in later antiquity.'° The 39-line hexameter poem presents us with a complex interplay of literary, philosophical and religious motifs.'' The poem displays the literary form of a conventional cult hymn, makes use of epic phraseology and contains several allusions to earlier authors. Significant parts of the : Hymn may be interpreted in both a philosophical and a religious sense, which is mainly because of the ambiguous nature of Zeus as being both } immanent and transcendent. The composition of the Hymn to Zeus has the typical tripartite structure of ancient hymns, namely Invocation (vv. 1-6), Argument (vv. 7-31) and Prayer (vv. 32-39). Careful analysis of the composition shows that the main issue addressed in the poem is the bad people who by their * For a text and translation, as well as an introduction and detailed commentary on the Huma see Johan C. Thom, Cleanthes' Ilyman to Zeus: Text, Translation, and Commentary ! (Studien und Texte zu Antike und Christentum 33; Tlibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005). To the bibliography on the Hymn listed in this work we should now add the chapter on the Hymn posthumously published in Giinther Zuntz, Griechische philosophische Hymmen (¢4. Hubert Cancik and Lutz. Kappel; Studien und Texte zu Antike und Christentum 35; Tiibingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005),27-42; as well as Elizabeth Asmis, “Myth and Philosophy in Cleanthes’ Hyman to Zeus,” GRBS 47 (2007): 413-29, * See Thom, Cleanthes’ Hymn to Zeus, 6-7, 11-12 "Cf. Matthias Perkams, "Kleanthes,” RAC 20 (2004), 1258. We unfortunately have ro other explicit evidence of its reception in antiquity, although @ good case has heen made that Lucretius composed the introductory hymn to Venus as an Epicurean counterpart to the Hymn fo Zeus; see Ulrich von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, “Kleanthes: Hymns suf Zeus,” in Reden und Vortrage, Vol. (4th ed; Berlin: Weidmannsche Huchhandhung, 1925-26), 328; Emst Neustadt, “Der Zeushymnos des Kleanthes.” Hermes 66 (1931): 393-95; and esp. Elizabeth Asmis, “Lucretius? Venus and Stoic Zeus,” Hermes 110 (1982): 458-70. For other possible allusions to the Hymn ro Zeus see Johan C. Thom, “Doing Justice to Zeus: On Texts and Commentaries,” Acta Classica 48 (2005): 4= “" For more details, see Thom, “Doing Justive to Zeus.”