Читать книгу A Companion to the Hellenistic and Roman Near East онлайн

168 страница из 236

1 ssss1 I should therefore like to weaken my over-sharp contrast (Lightfoot 2003: 90) between the Herodotean master-text and the Hellenistic specialist commentary.

2 ssss1 Philo identifies linguistically as a Greek (1.10.51). For Philo’s likely proficiency in Phoenician, see Barr 1974–1975: 43–44.

3 ssss1 Though his work was not fixated on Phoenicia. It also looked outwards, especially to Egypt, while still giving the Phoenicians priority (1.10.32, 38).

4 ssss1 Despite Eusebius’s claim that Sanchuniathon testified that the same gods were still worshipped in the cities and country districts (1.19.22).

5 ssss1 In Diod. Sic. 3.60.4 the couplings of the seven daughters of Atlas give rise to genealogies of gods and culture heroes (but there are no pairs of siblings).

6 ssss1Hecataeus is a possible example of Euhemerism before Euhemerus (Murray 1970: 151 and n.4), though the relative chronology of the two works is tight.

C.T. Robert Hayward

Jews were widely dispersed over the Hellenistic and Roman Near East: principal centres of Jewish population, outside the Land of Israel, included Egypt, Syria, Asia Minor, Babylonia, and Arabia. Evidence of their presence far and wide in the Greco-Roman world is amply attested by inscriptions, papyrus fragments, coins, graffiti, and other literary remains (Williams 1998 and updates). Despite continuing debates about degrees of literacy among Jews (Hezser 2001; Carr 2005), the very considerable literary output of Jews in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek which saw the light of day from the third century BCE, when the Torah of Moses was translated from Hebrew into Greek, up to the sixth–seventh century CE, when the Babylonian Talmud probably reached its final form (Kalmin 2006), cannot be denied.