Journal of Biblical Literature - Society of Biblical Literature

Book Reviews
gion, as Hengel accuses his critics, but to question the role and identification of traditionalism.
Jews in the Hellenistic World
Hengel’s book throws open a number of questions on the role of Jews in Hellenistic
society, but he relies too much on the assumptions of his predecessors. First, it is a
given that Jews would need in some way to respond and accommodate to Greek culture.
We have already discussed the colonial presuppositions of this. It is a view derived from
a small number of hostile statements in Greco-Roman writers, which need to be interpreted
in the context of Greek ethnography and history. The interest of the topic itself in
modern scholarship also needs to be seen in its contemporary sociopolitical context
from Théodore Reinach (Textes des Auteurs Grecs et Latins relative au Judaisme [Paris,
1895]) onwards. Second, it is presumed that a writer in Greek would have apologetic
purposes whether addressing Jews or Greeks. This position does not allow for other possible
explanations.
The problem with these assumptions is that they contradict the essential thesis of
the book, and perhaps the real shortfall is that the thesis is not taken far enough. If
Judaism was truly hellenized, then we should take the Jewish Hellenistic writers more
seriously as Hellenistic authors. Rather than considering Jewish writers as imitating
Greek conventions for apologetic purposes, it should be asked what it means for Jews to
be able to write in such a manner. What was their social status if they had such a high
level of education to compose Greek works of poetry, philosophy, and history?
The Non-Hellenization of Judaism
Although hellenization is clear in the case of many writers of the time, we should
also inquire as to its limits. If we did not know the date of certain books, could we identify
them as Hellenistic works? Ben Sira reveals little that is essentially “Greek,” except
for the author using his own name. There are indeed parallels with Greek writers (especially
Theognis), and a proverb reminiscent of Homer, but these are only apparent if we
know that the book was composed in that time (cf. Otto Kaiser, “Die Rezeption der
stoischen Providenz bei Ben Sira,” JNSL 24 [1998]: 41–54). Certainly Sirach is to be
viewed in contrast to the Wisdom of Solomon, which is not only written in Greek but
also has a sophisticated Greek philosophical vocabulary and sentence structure and
expresses beliefs in the afterlife and the nature of the soul. Thus, when referring to hellenized
Judaism, we must distinguish between different forms and levels. It is possible
that the effects of hellenization on Judaism can be seen in a mind-set that is visible
beyond external appearances, as G. W. Bowersock argues for late antiquity (Hellenism
in Late Antiquity [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990]). Recently Sacha
Stern (Time and Process in Ancient Judaism [London/Portland, OR: Littman Library,
2003], 90–102) has argued that the Greek concept of time is absent in Jewish Hellenistic
and rabbinic literature, which, if correct, would suggest that hellenization did not in fact
have the all pervasive influence often thought. The diversity in Judaism also does not
allow for a simple description of it as “Hellenistic,” and, if John J. Collins is correct in his
interpretation of Greek Jewish literature (Between Athens and Jerusalem: Jewish Identity
in the Hellenistic Diaspora [2nd ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000]), then there
are some distinctive Diaspora features that suggest a different emphasis from Pales-
339