TRANSCRIBER’S NOTE
Italic text is denoted by _underscores_.
Bold text is denoted by =equal signs=.
Footnote anchors are denoted by [number], and the footnotes have
been placed at the end of the book.
A superscript is denoted by ^x or ^{xx}.
Breves and macrons are accurately represented (ă ĕ ā ē etc). The
alef symbol ℵ is used on page 379.
The tables in this book are best viewed using a monospace font.
Some minor changes to the text are noted at the end of the book.
THE BOOKS OF THE APOCRYPHA
THEIR ORIGIN, TEACHING AND CONTENTS
LIBRARY OF HISTORIC THEOLOGY
EDITED BY THE REV. WM. C. PIERCY, M.A.
_Each Volume, Demy 8vo, Cloth, Red Burnished Top, 5s. net._
VOLUMES NOW READY.
THE PRESENT RELATIONS OF SCIENCE AND RELIGION.
By the Rev. Professor T. G. BONNEY, D.Sc.
ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
By Professor EDOUARD NAVILLE, D.C.L.
MYSTICISM IN CHRISTIANITY.
By the Rev. W. K. FLEMING, M.A., B.D.
RELIGION IN AN AGE OF DOUBT.
By the Rev. C. J. SHEBBEARE, M.A.
THE CATHOLIC CONCEPTION OF THE CHURCH.
By the Rev W. J. SPARROW SIMPSON, D.D.
COMMON OBJECTIONS TO CHRISTIANITY.
By the Rev. C. L. DRAWBRIDGE, M.A.
MARRIAGE IN CHURCH AND STATE.
By the Rev. T. A. LACEY, M.A. (Warden of the London Diocesan
Penitentiary).
THE BUILDING UP OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
By the Rev. Canon R. B. GIRDLESTONE, M.A.
CHRISTIANITY AND OTHER FAITHS. An Essay in Comparative Religion
By the Rev. W. ST. CLAIR TISDALL, D.D.
THE CHURCHES IN BRITAIN. _Vols. I._ and _II._
By the Rev. ALFRED PLUMMER, D.D. (formerly Master of University
College, Durham).
CHARACTER AND RELIGION.
By the Rev. the HON. EDWARD LYTTELTON, M.A. (Head Master of Eton
College).
MISSIONARY METHODS, ST. PAUL’S OR OURS?
By the Rev. ROLAND ALLEN, M.A. (Author of “Missionary Principles”).
THE RULE OF FAITH AND HOPE.
By the Rev. R. L. OTTLEY, D.D. (Canon of Christ Church, and Regius
Professor of Pastoral Theology in the University of Oxford).
THE RULE OF LIFE AND LOVE.
By the Rev. R. L. OTTLEY, D.D.
THE RULE OF WORK AND WORSHIP.
By the Rev. R. L. OTTLEY, D.D.
THE CREEDS: THEIR HISTORY, NATURE AND USE.
By the Rev. HAROLD SMITH, M.A. (Lecturer at the London College of
Divinity).
THE CHRISTOLOGY OF ST. PAUL (Hulsean Prize Essay).
By the Rev. S. NOWELL ROSTRON, M.A. (Late Principal of St. John’s
Hall, Durham).
_The following works are in Preparation_:—
RELIGIOUS EDUCATION: ITS PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE.
By the Rev. Prebendary B. REYNOLDS.
THE CHURCH OUTSIDE THE EMPIRE.
By the Rev. C. R. DAVEY BIGGS, D.D.
THE NATURE OF FAITH AND THE CONDITIONS OF ITS PROSPERITY.
By the Rev. P. N. WAGGETT, M.A.
THE ETHICS OF TEMPTATION.
By the Ven. E. E. HOLMES, M.A.
EARLY CHRISTIAN LITERATURE.
By the Rev. WM. C. PIERCY, M.A.
AUTHORITY AND FREETHOUGHT IN THE MIDDLE AGES.
By the Rev. F. W. BUSSELL, D.D.
GOD AND MAN, ONE CHRIST.
By the Rev. CHARLES E. RAVEN, M.A.
GREEK THOUGHT AND CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE.
By the Rev. J. K. MOZLEY, M.A.
THE GREAT SCHISM BETWEEN THE EAST AND WEST.
By the Rev. F. J. FOAKES-JACKSON, D.D.
THE PEOPLE OF ISRAEL IN OLD TESTAMENT HISTORY.
By the Rev. A. TROELSTRA, D.D.
Full particulars of this Library may be obtained from the Publisher.
LONDON: ROBERT SCOTT.
THE BOOKS OF THE
APOCRYPHA
THEIR ORIGIN, TEACHING AND
CONTENTS
BY THE REV.
W. O. E. OESTERLEY, D.D.
EXAMINING CHAPLAIN TO THE BISHOP OF LONDON; WARDEN OF THE
“SOCIETY OF THE APOCRYPHA,” LONDON DIOCESE.
LONDON: ROBERT SCOTT
ROXBURGHE HOUSE
PATERNOSTER ROW, E.C.
1915
_All Rights Reserved_
_First Edition_, 1914.
_Second Impression_, 1915.
PREFACE
Signs have not been wanting during the last few years of an
increasing interest both in what is called the “Apocrypha” as well as
in the body of literature, mainly of an apocalyptic character, which
goes under the name of the “Pseudepigrapha.”
Notable among these signs are two of an outstanding character. The
founding of the “International Society for the Promoting of the Study
of the Apocrypha” was an important event in this connection; the
founder, the Rev. Herbert Pentin, is to be sincerely congratulated
on the success with which his efforts have been crowned; the support
accorded by many of our leading scholars has doubtless been very
gratifying to him. Few things have done more to foster interest in
the subjects which the Society has at heart than the publication of
its quarterly journal, _The International Journal of Apocrypha_.
This magazine makes its appeal to all grades of readers; and if the
greater stress is laid upon the popular side, the editor has his
good reasons for this, for it is the general reader who does not yet
understand that the “Apocrypha” and the “Pseudepigrapha” together
form an indispensable link between the Old and New Testaments.
The second outstanding sign was the publication last year by the
Oxford University Press of the two sumptuous volumes entitled _The
Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament in English_, with
introductions and critical and explanatory notes to the several
books, edited, in conjunction with many scholars, by R. H. Charles,
Litt.D., D.D. This is the most elaborate thing of the kind ever
published in any country, and the debt to Canon Charles owed by all
lovers of learning is great indeed. The volumes appeal primarily to
the scholar, though the general reader will find in them a very great
deal which he will be able to appreciate. The drawback, for most
people, is their expense, obviously inevitable; it is, therefore,
the more to be regretted that the University Press could not see its
way to publish the various books in separate, as well as in their
collective, form.
Signs such as these are full of promise, and the growing interest
which they betoken is very welcome.
The present writer, as one of the Wardens of the afore-mentioned
Society, and as one of Canon Charles’ fellow-labourers in the work
just referred to, has been emboldened to write the following pages
with the object of pressing home the importance of one department
of the subject as a whole (though without wholly losing sight of
the other), viz., the “Apocrypha,” and, more especially, what is
involved by the study of this. The very unfortunate title which
has clung to this body of literature since the days of St. Jerome,
largely accounts for the attitude of suspicion with which it is often
regarded; but when once it is realized that the term “Apocrypha,”
as applied to these books, does not correspond to what is nowadays
understood by the word “apocryphal,” this attitude of suspicion will
disappear.
The study of these books opens up various questions which demand
consideration; so much so, that the student soon comes to realize
that important as the study of the Apocrypha is, more important
still is that which this study involves. The book here presented
is intended to illustrate this; with the result that Part I
(“Prolegomena”) occupies considerably more space than Part II,
which is devoted to the books of the Apocrypha themselves. There is,
however, no reason to offer any apology for this, as the Introductory
Note to the “Prolegomena” will show.
For the rest, the book, though primarily intended for the intelligent
general reader, may in some parts, it is hoped, be of interest to
scholars. It was originally intended to be a contribution to “The
Library of Historic Theology”; but the writer soon realized that
the scope of the subject would necessitate a larger volume than
the publishers thought desirable for this Series; they, therefore,
decided to publish it separately.
The writer desires to express his sincere thanks to the Rev. Wm. C.
Piercy for having read carefully through the book in manuscript as
well as in proof, and for having offered many valuable suggestions.
W. O. E. OESTERLEY.
HATCH END, 1914.
CONTENTS
PAGE
INTRODUCTORY 1
_PART I_
PROLEGOMENA TO THE APOCRYPHA
CHAPTER I
THE HELLENISTIC MOVEMENT 11
I. Hellenism in its Secular Aspect 12
II. Hellenism in its Religious Aspect 20
Summary 24
CHAPTER II
HELLENISTIC INFLUENCE UPON THE JEWS OF PALESTINE 27
I. Hellenism and Judaism 27
II. The Essenes 41
Summary 46
CHAPTER III
HELLENISTIC INFLUENCE UPON THE JEWS OF THE DISPERSION 49
I. The Dispersion 49
II. Hellenistic Influence on Religion 54
III. The Septuagint 58
IV. Philo of Alexandria 61
Summary 65
CHAPTER IV
TRACES OF GREEK INFLUENCE IN THE OLD TESTAMENT AND IN
THE APOCRYPHA 68
I. References to the Greeks in the Old Testament 68
II. Traces of Greek Influence in the Old Testament 70
III. Traces of Greek Influence in the Apocrypha 77
Ecclesiasticus 77
Wisdom:
(_a_) The doctrine of the pre-existence of the soul 80
(_b_) The doctrine of immortality 83
(_c_) The doctrine of the badness of the body 84
(_d_) The creation of the world out of formless
matter 85
(_e_) Signs of the influence of Stoic philosophy 86
Summary 87
CHAPTER V
THE APOCALYPTIC MOVEMENT 90
I. The Beginnings of the Apocalyptic Movement 90
II. The Apocalyptists 95
III. The Doctrinal Teaching of the Apocalyptic Literature 101
(_a_) Individualism 102
(_b_) Particularism and Universalism 103
(_c_) The doctrine of the Messiah 105
(_d_) The doctrine of the Future Life 107
Summary 111
CHAPTER VI
THE SCRIBES 113
(_a_) The Old Testament _data_ 113
(_b_) The Apocrypha _data_ 123
(_c_) Some further particulars 126
Summary 127
CHAPTER VII
THE PHARISEES AND SADDUCEES 130
I. The Meaning of the Terms “Pharisees” and “Sadducees” 130
(_a_) Pharisees 130
(_b_) Sadducees 132
II. The Sources 135
(_a_) Josephus 135
(_b_) Rabbinical sources 137
(_c_) The New Testament 138
(_d_) The Zadokite Fragments 138
III. The Doctrines of the Pharisees and Sadducees 139
(_a_) The doctrine of the Law 139
(_b_) The doctrine of God 144
(_c_) The doctrine of the Future Life 146
(_d_) The Sadducæan attitude regarding belief in
the existence of angels and spirits 147
(_e_) The doctrine of the Messiah 148
(_f_) The Sadducees and the Jewish Calendar 150
IV. Some Subsidiary Considerations 152
Summary 157
CHAPTER VIII
THE ORIGIN OF THE OLD TESTAMENT CANON 160
I. The Hebrew Canon in its Present Form 162
II. The Idea of a Canon 164
III. The Formation of the Hebrew Canon 169
IV. To Whom was the Final Fixing of the Hebrew Canon due? 174
Summary 176
Additional Note. The Conceptions underlying the Idea of
Levitical Impurity 177
CHAPTER IX
UNCANONICAL BOOKS (I) 183
I. The Meaning of the Term _Gānaz_ 183
II. The Meaning of the Term _Apokryphos_ 185
III. The Connexion between the Terms _Gānaz_ and
_Apokryphos_ 188
IV. How the Term “Apocrypha” came to be applied to
Sacred Books of the Second Rank 190
V. The Reading of Uncanonical Books 192
Summary 196
CHAPTER X
UNCANONICAL BOOKS (II). THE APOCALYPTIC LITERATURE 198
Preliminary Remarks 198
(_a_) The Book of Enoch 201
(_b_) The Sibylline Oracles 208
(_c_) The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs 210
(_d_) The Psalms of Solomon 214
(_e_) The Book of Jubilees 216
(_f_) The Assumption of Moses 218
(_g_) The Ascension of Isaiah 219
(_h_) The Book of the Secrets of Enoch 220
(_i_) The Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch 222
(_j_) The Apocalypse of Moses (The Life of Adam
and Eve) 222
(_k_) The Greek Apocalypse of Baruch 223
CHAPTER XI
THE WISDOM LITERATURE; THE JEWISH CONCEPTION OF WISDOM 224
I. The Wisdom Literature 224
II. The Origin of the Hebrew Conception of Wisdom 226
III. The Jewish Conception of Wisdom 233
Summary 247
CHAPTER XII
THE DOCTRINAL TEACHING OF THE APOCRYPHA 251
Preliminary Remarks 251
(_a_) The doctrine of God 254
(_b_) The doctrine of the Law 260
(_c_) The doctrine of Sin 267
(_d_) The doctrine of Grace and Free-will 278
(_e_) The doctrine of the Messiah 281
(_f_) The doctrine of the Future Life 288
(_g_) The doctrine of Angels 300
(_h_) Demonology 304
Summary 305
_PART II_
INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOKS OF THE APOCRYPHA
INTRODUCTORY 319
CHAPTER I
THE WISDOM OF JESUS, THE SON OF SIRACH; OR ECCLESIASTICUS 321
I. The Title of the Book 321
II. The Author and his Book 322
III. The Date of the Book 327
IV. The Original Language of the Book; the recently found
Hebrew Manuscripts 329
V. The Authorized and Revised Versions of Ecclesiasticus 331
VI. The “Sadducæan” doctrinal standpoint in
Ecclesiasticus 334
VII. The Pharisaic Additions to Ecclesiasticus 340
VIII. The Value of the Book for the Study of the New
Testament 345
CHAPTER II
THE BOOK OF TOBIT 349
I. The Story of Achikar the Wise 350
II. The Relationship between the Book of Tobit and the
Story of Achikar the Wise 353
III. The Contents of the Book of Tobit 357
IV. The Religious Standpoint of the Writer 360
V. The Date of the Book, its Integrity and Place of
Origin 365
VI. The Value of the Book for New Testament Study 368
CHAPTER III
THE BOOK OF JUDITH 372
I. Contents and Character of the Book 372
II. Variety of Form of the Judith Story 379
III. The Teaching and Purpose of the Book 381
IV. The Date of the Book 382
V. The Original Language of the Book 384
CHAPTER IV
THE ADDITIONS TO THE BOOK OF DANIEL 385
I. Preliminary Remarks 385
II. The Prayer of Azariah 386
III. The Song of the Three Children 390
IV. The Story of Susanna 391
V. Bel and the Dragon 394
CHAPTER V
THE ADDITIONS TO THE BOOK OF ESTHER 398
I. The Nature and Object of the Additions 398
II. Authorship and Date of the Additions 403
CHAPTER VI
THE PRAYER OF MANASSES 404
I. The Contents of the Prayer 404
II. The Origin of the Prayer 405
III. The Date of the Prayer 409
IV. The Writer and the Language in which he wrote 410
CHAPTER VII
THE FIRST BOOK OF MACCABEES 411
I. Title and Authorship of the Book 411
II. The Date of the Book 413
III. The Original Language and Literary Character of the
Book 414
IV. The Sources of the Book 415
V. The History of the Maccabæan Struggle 423
(_a_) The Conquests of Alexander the Great, and the
division of his Empire 424
(_b_) The original cause of the struggle; the
leadership of Mattathias 424
(_c_) The leadership of Judas Maccabæus; religious
liberty secured 427
(_d_) The leadership of Jonathan; the establishment
of the Hasmonæan high-priesthood 431
(_e_) The leadership of Simon 436
CHAPTER VIII
THE GREEK EZRA (1 (3) Esdras) 439
I. The Title of the Book 439
II. Contents of the Book 440
III. The “Hebrew Ezra,” the “Greek Ezra,” and 2 Esdras 442
IV. The Historicity of the Book 446
V. The Purpose of the Book 450
VI. The Story of the Three Young Men of Darius’ Bodyguard 451
VII. The Date of the Book 454
CHAPTER IX
THE BOOK OF WISDOM (The Wisdom of Solomon) 455
I. The Title and Authorship of the Book 455
II. The Date of the Book 459
III. The Question of Composite Authorship 464
IV. The Purposes for which the Book was Written 469
V. The Influence of the Book on St. Paul 474
CHAPTER X
THE SECOND BOOK OF MACCABEES 479
I. The Origin of the Book 479
II. The Contents of the Book 481
III. Comparison between 1 and 2 Maccabees 482
IV. The Historical Value of 2 Maccabees 485
V. The Purpose of the Book 487
VI. The Integrity of the Boo 490
VII. The Date and Original Language of the Book 493
VIII. The influence of the Book on New Testament Writers 493
CHAPTER XI
THE BOOK OF BARUCH, AND THE EPISTLE OF JEREMIAH 495
I. Short Account of the Book, and its Contents 495
II. Examination of the Component Parts of the Book 497
(1) The Book of Confessions (i.-iii. 8) 497
(2) A Sage’s words of encouragement (iii. 9-iv. 4) 503
(3) A Message of good cheer (iv. 5-v. 9) 504
The Epistle of Jeremiah 506
CHAPTER XII
THE EZRA APOCALYPSE (2 (4) Esdras) 509
I. The Title of the Book 509
II. Chapters i., ii. 510
III. Chapters xv., xvi. 511
IV. The Component Parts of Chapters iii.-xiv. 512
V. The Vision of the Man Rising from the Sea 515
VI. The Eagle Vision 517
VII. The Salathiel Apocalypse 522
VIII. An Ezra Legend 528
INDEXES—
General 533
Passages from the Old Testament 545
Passages from the Apocrypha 547
Passages from the Pseudepigrapha 552
Passages from the New Testament 552
Passages from Rabbinical Literature 553
Introductory
The book here presented is divided into two parts: the first, which
is somewhat longer than the second, deals with preliminary questions;
the second is occupied with some account of the nature and contents
of the books comprised under the term “Apocrypha.” To those whose
studies have not been concerned with early Jewish uncanonical
literature it may appear that many of the subjects discussed in Part
I are inappropriate, or at any rate unnecessary, because they lead,
apparently, far away from the main subject to be dealt with. Students
of the Apocrypha will know, however, that a really intelligent and
adequate study of this body of ancient literature necessitates
research into a number of topics which do not at first sight appear
to show a direct connexion with the main subject. Nevertheless, for
the benefit of those who have not made a study of the Apocrypha, it
may be well to justify at the outset the incursion into the many
side-issues dealt with in the “Prolegomena” (Part I) by showing
that the consideration of them is really indispensable for a proper
understanding of the Apocrypha, its origin, and its _raison d’être_.
Now one of the first things that must strike any intelligent reader
of the books of the Apocrypha is the extraordinary variety of their
contents. We have in the First Book of Maccabees genuine historical
records of the highest value; in the Second Book of Maccabees, on
the other hand, we have a mixture of history and fiction. In the
First (or Third) Book of Esdras we get portions of the canonical
Scriptures side by side with records from other sources; and,
strange to say, the latter are probably in some particulars more
trustworthy than the corresponding portions in the former. In The
Rest of Esther and the Prayer of Manasses we have additions to books
of the canonical Scriptures which are edifying, though largely the
work of the imagination; while in the additions to the Book of
Daniel, namely, The Song of the Three Holy Children, The History of
Susannah, and Bel and the Dragon, we have examples of fiction which
are not always edifying. Of an entirely different character is the
fascinating story of a brave and patriotic woman, told in the Book
of Judith, in which the writer’s power of dramatic narrative is
well exhibited. Interesting from other points of view is the homely
tale told in the Book of Tobit, with its developed angelology and
quaint demonology. But what is in many respects the most important
book in the whole collection is that fine example of the Palestinian
Wisdom Literature, the Wisdom of Ben-Sira (Ecclesiasticus), which,
apart from its subject proper, gives us much interesting information
regarding the conditions of Jewish life and manners during a period
of which we have otherwise but meagre sources of knowledge. Baruch,
again, is valuable as containing a liturgical piece of considerable
antiquity. Very important, too, and of great interest, is that
striking product of Hellenistic-Jewish wisdom, The Wisdom of Solomon,
as it is called; this book offers an illustration of the profound
influence which the Greek spirit had upon the Jews of the Dispersion.
And, lastly, we have what is in some respects one of the finest books
belonging to the Apocalyptic Literature ii. (iv.) Esdras, revealing
as it does in a wonderful way the moral and religious speculations
of an earnest mind seeking after the truth, and claiming to have
received revelations by supernatural means. Scripture, history,
legend, fiction, at least one liturgical piece, wisdom, philosophy,
apocalypse—truly it is an extraordinary variety of subjects which is
here presented.
But further; when one looks more closely one sees that in these
books various thought-tendencies and mental attitudes are
represented—political, intellectual, doctrinal, religious; so that
questions arise, and demand consideration, as to who the men were
among whom these thought-tendencies existed, what it was that first
gave rise to them, what the relation was between those who belonged
to the different schools of thought represented, and other questions
of a similar character. The intelligent reader will want to know,
on the one hand, what is reflected in these books concerning such
questions, and, on the other, what light they themselves shed on the
history of thought and religion during the period, extending over
about three hundred years, at which they were written.
Of a different character, but very much to the point, is the inquiry
into the position held by these books in the sacred literature of
the Jews. They are not assigned a place in the canonical Hebrew
Scriptures, but they are found in the Greek Old Testament, which was
the Bible used by the New Testament writers and by the Early Church.
Who excluded them from the canonical list, and on what grounds
were they excluded? What was their position before the Canon was
formed, and when was the Canon formed? What is meant by the title
“Apocrypha,” by whom was the title given, and when?
These are some of the many questions which suggest themselves to the
serious student of the Apocrypha; and a moment’s thought will show
that adequate answers to them are required if the contents of the
Apocrypha, and all that they imply, are to be properly understood.
The purpose of the “Prolegomena” is to try and give answers to these
and many other questions which arise as soon as the study of this
body of ancient Jewish sacred literature is undertaken.
The first chapter deals with the Hellenistic Movement. Some
consideration of the way in which the Greek spirit influenced the
world in general, from the third century B.C. onwards, is altogether
necessary because there was no department of life in which the
effects of this influence were not to be discerned. For our present
purpose the way in which Hellenism affected religious thought is, of
course, an exceedingly important subject for consideration. Now the
Hellenistic Movement synchronized with the entire period during which
the “Apocryphal” Literature was produced. It commenced as a result
of the conquests of Alexander the Great, and extended well into the
times of the Empire; within that period were written the earliest
and the latest of the books of the Apocrypha, viz., The Wisdom of
Ben-Sira, about B.C. 170, and The Apocalypse of Ezra, about A.D. 100.
The Hellenistic Movement was thus, as it were, the intellectual and
religious atmosphere of the world during the whole of the period in
which the writers of the books of the Apocrypha lived. No apology is
needed, therefore, for beginning our study with a brief consideration
of the Hellenistic Movement.
Since, like other great movements, this one was a vital process
which affected the whole world, the Jews, as just hinted, came under
its sway. We have, therefore, devoted two chapters to Hellenistic
influence upon the Jews. The extent and effect of this influence
upon the Jews of Palestine was not the same as upon the Jews of the
Dispersion, so that this part of our subject has to be dealt with
under two heads. In discussing the former we touch upon a factor
in the discussion which will come before us again and again as we
proceed, namely, the Jews as the people of the Law. We referred
just now to various schools of thought of which indications are to
be seen in the books of the Apocrypha; the most important of these
was that which looked upon the Law and its observances as that
which should occupy the thoughts and actions of every true Jew,
and to which everything else should be subordinated. It was the
championship of the Law which checked, and ultimately stamped out,
Hellenistic influence upon the Jews of Palestine, though not until
that influence had so permeated their minds that some of its elements
became incorporated into orthodox Judaism. As will be seen later,
these facts help to explain much that is written in the books of the
Apocrypha.
But distinct as the marks were which the influence of Hellenism
left upon the Jews of Palestine and upon some of their literature,
that influence was far less upon them than upon the Jews of the
Dispersion. In dealing with this part of our subject a preliminary
section is devoted to some account of the Dispersion, special
reference being made to Alexandria, the most important centre
of the Dispersion. The most notable and far-reaching result of
Hellenistic influence here is to be seen in the fact that it was the
birthplace of the Septuagint, the Greek Old Testament; since it is
in this Version of the Scriptures that the books of the Apocrypha
were incorporated, it stands to reason that some account of it is
necessary. While the Septuagint was the most striking literary
product of the Hellenistic Movement in the Dispersion, Philo of
Alexandria was its most notable personality; a section devoted to him
can, therefore, not be out of place.
It was pointed out above that Hellenistic influence was to be
discerned in the sacred literature of the Jews. This is a subject
upon which differences of opinion exist, especially in regard to
some of the later books of the Old Testament; but it cannot well
be ignored in dealing with the books of the Apocrypha, so that in
Chapter IV we examine the question of traces of Greek influence in
the Old Testament and in the Apocrypha.
Further, we have referred to the fact that in the Apocrypha signs
of the existence of various thought-tendencies are to be discerned;
the attitude of extreme loyalty to the Law was one of these; another
was represented by the Apocalyptic Movement. Quite apart from the
fact that we have in The Apocalypse of Ezra a remarkable product
of the Apocalyptic Movement, which would of itself be sufficient
to demand some account of this movement here, there is the further
fact that some insight into the religious movements of a period is
indispensable to the true understanding of any body of literature
belonging to such period. It is for this reason that we have devoted
a chapter to the consideration of the Apocalyptic Movement and to a
brief survey of the doctrinal teaching of the Apocalyptic Literature;
it will be found to be of real interest if the general results of the
doctrinal teaching of this literature be compared with that of the
books of the Apocrypha, which is more fully dealt with in the last
chapter (XII) of the “Prolegomena.”
The thought-tendencies to which reference has been made, and each
of which has been embodied in literary form, have a history behind
them, dating at least from the time of Ezra; how these developed in
Palestine during the four centuries which preceded the advent of
Christ is a difficult and intricate, but none the less fascinating,
study, and altogether indispensable alike for the understanding
of the Apocrypha and of the New Testament. Scribes of different
kinds, _Chassidim_, Apocalyptists, Pharisees and Sadducees, how did
they come into being? What were their different special mental and
religious attitudes? What was their relationship to each other? There
are intricate problems involved in such questions, and the study of
the Apocrypha brings us face to face with them; that sufficiently
explains the reason why Chapters V-VII are devoted to the discussion
of them.
With Chapters VIII-X we approach an entirely different side of
our subject, namely, the question of the Canon and of uncanonical
books generally; this is, of course, of fundamental importance for
the study of the Apocrypha, so that no explanation is needed for
the reason of these three chapters figuring in the “Prolegomena.”
The same is also true of Chapter XI, which deals with the Wisdom
Literature, for not only have we two remarkable examples of this
literature in the Apocrypha, but it is a literature which, while
it begins in the Old Testament, is continued in the Apocrypha, so
that it must be treated as a whole; the question of canonical or
uncanonical books must not be allowed to interfere here.
The last chapter (XII), on the doctrinal teaching of the Apocrypha,
requires no further words here other than to say that the study of
this subject is very necessary for following out the development of
doctrine from the Old Testament to the New.
This, then, is the explanation and justification for the many
discussions in the “Prolegomena” which seem at first sight to lead
far away from the main subject in hand. These have, it is true, an
interest and an application far beyond that of their relation to the
Apocrypha, but that, it may safely be assumed, will not be regarded
as a drawback, or as a reason for making the discussion of them here
unnecessary.
_PART I_
PROLEGOMENA TO THE
APOCRYPHA
THE BOOKS OF THE APOCRYPHA: THEIR ORIGIN, TEACHING AND CONTENTS
CHAPTER I
The Hellenistic Movement
[LITERATURE.—Droysen, _Geschichte des Hellenismus_ (3rd ed.,
1877); Schürer, _A History of the Jewish People in the Time of
Jesus Christ_, II, i. pp. 1-149 (1890-1891), German ed. II,
pp. 1-267 (1901-1909); Usener, _Götternamen_ (1896); Kaerst,
_Geschichte des hellenistischen Zeitalters_ (1901, 1909); Zeller,
_Die Philosophie der Griechen_, III, i. ii. (4th ed., 1903,
1909); Zeller, _Outlines of the History of Greek Philosophy_
(Engl. ed., 1909); Rohde, _Psyche_ (3rd ed., 1903); Edwyn Bevan,
_Jerusalem under the High-priests_ (1904); M. Friedländer,
_Griechische Philosophie im Alten Testament_ (1904); Gruppe,
_Griechische Mythologie und Religionsgeschichte_ (1906); Mahaffy,
_The Silver Age of the Greek World_ (1906); Krüger, _Hellenismus
und Judenthum im neutestamentlichen Zeitalter_ (1908); Farnell,
_Greek Religion_ (1912); Wendland, _Die Hellenistisch-Römische
Kultur in ihren Beziehungen zu Judentum und Christentum_ (1912);
Edwyn Bevan, _Stoics and Sceptics_ (1913); Farnell’s art. on
“Greek Religion” in Hastings’ _Dict. of Religion and Ethics_.]
To offer in any detail an account of such an immense subject as the
Hellenistic Movement would be out of the question here; but no study
which has to do with Jewish religion or culture of the three last
pre-Christian centuries can be taken in hand without some reference
to the Movement which so profoundly affected the world of those
times. The object of the present chapter is, therefore, to indicate
the main directions in which Hellenistic influence was exercised;
so much is essential when it is remembered that the books of the
Apocrypha form an integral part of the Greek Old Testament, which is
itself one of the most striking products of the Hellenistic Movement
in the domain of literature.
A word must be said at the outset regarding the use of the terms
_Hellenic_ and _Hellenistic_. It is not always easy to be strictly
logical or consistent in the way in which one employs these; the
fundamental difference between the two is this: _Hellenic culture_
refers, of course, to the pure Greek civilization, religion, etc.,
existing previous to the coming of Alexander the Great; _Hellenistic
culture_ refers to this civilization as it appeared after having
absorbed numerous elements in the domain both of thought and religion
from non-Greek sources after the coming of Alexander the Great.
Hellenistic culture exercised a greater and wider influence upon the
world than Hellenic, because by absorbing alien elements it was able
to become a world-culture. The terms have thus a distinct and clearly
defined difference. But inasmuch as Hellenistic culture is based upon
and has as its chief characteristic Hellenic culture, it is sometimes
convenient to use the terms Hellenism and Hellenic in a wide and
inclusive sense; as so used it is equivalent to the term _Greek_,
without restriction to any particular age.
I. HELLENISM IN ITS SECULAR ASPECT
By the Hellenistic Movement is meant the process whereby the
supremacy of the Greek language and of Greek culture generally became
established during the period, roughly speaking, from B.C. 300 to
the beginning of the Christian era, that is to say, from the time
when Alexander the Great had completed his victorious career[1]
to the time when the Roman Empire was rising to pre-eminence and
establishing its power, more especially in the east. It was during
this period that Hellenism was what may be called an invading force;
having once established itself its influence was in evidence long
after the period indicated. Dill, in writing on the age of Hadrian
and the Antonines, says, for example: “The glory of classic art had
almost vanished; and yet, without being able to produce any works of
creative genius, the inexhaustible vitality of the Hellenic spirit
once more asserted itself. After a long eclipse, the rhetorical
culture of Greece vigorously addressed itself in the reign of Hadrian
to the conquest of the west. Her teachers and spiritual directors,
indeed, had long been in every family of note. Her sophists were now
seen haranguing crowds in every town from the Don to the Atlantic....
From the early years of the second century can be traced that great
combined movement of the Neo-Pythagorean and Platonist philosophies
and the renovated paganism which made a last stand against the
conquering Church in the reigns of Julian and Theodosius....”[2]
But the influence of Hellenism did not stop here; various writers
have shown that that influence persists even up to modern times,[3]
and Bevan states nothing but the literal truth when he says that
“what we call the Western spirit in our own day is really Hellenism
reincarnate.”[4]
It is well to realize, on the other hand, however, that the roots
of the Hellenistic Movement reached back somewhat further than the
time of Alexander. We must look to Athens for the real beginnings of
the Movement, the further development of which Alexander’s conquests
did so much to forward. It was the Attic sea-power which first
brought about the conditions under which the idea of a pan-Hellenic
culture could take form and ultimately become realized. Though Athens
declined with the rise of the Macedonian power, and ceased outwardly
to play any conspicuous part in the great drama of the world’s
history, yet Attic ideals and conceptions lived on and continued to
be the inner motive-power in the propagation of the newer culture.
So that the Hellenistic Movement grew and developed from Attic
antecedents.
Then, again, although the rise of the Hellenistic Movement is
rightly associated more particularly with the name of Alexander,
it is but simple justice which compels us to recall the fact that
the Macedonian empire, which formed the basis of Alexander’s future
world-power, owed its creation to his father, Philip (B.C. 359-336).
It was only through strenuous struggles with Thracians, Illyrians and
Athenians that Philip finally consolidated his kingdom, and thus made
the necessary preparations for his son’s greater work. The decisive
battle of Chæronea, in B.C. 338, when Philip defeated the allied
forces of Athens and Thebes, may legitimately be pointed to as one of
the preliminary determining factors which prepared the way for the
Hellenistic Movement.
In the first instance the influence of the newer Hellenism was, of
course, exercised by means of the Greek language. But it was a form
of Greek which differed in many respects from the older Attic Greek,
though based on this; it is now known by the name of Hellenistic
Greek. “It was the literary language of the cosmopolitan Hellas,
created by the genius of Alexander. The change [i.e., from Attic
Greek] had begun indeed before Alexander. Even Xenophon allows
himself to make free use of words of provincial origin, and to
employ Attic words with a new connotation; and the writings of
Aristotle mark the opening of a new era in the history of the Greek
language.”[5] The discovery and study of immense numbers of Greek
_papyri_ and _ostraka_ (potsherds) has shown the fallacy, universally
prevalent a generation ago, of speaking of “Biblical Greek,” i.e.,
the Greek of the Septuagint and of the New Testament, as though it
were a form of Greek peculiar to the Bible, to be separated off from
“profane” Greek. The Septuagint and the New Testament were written in
a late form of Greek, i.e., Hellenistic Greek which, as we have just
seen, came into vogue during the fourth century B.C. and onwards.
This late Greek, including the Greek of the Bible is, in the words
of Deissmann, “neither good nor bad; it bears the stamp of its age
and asserts its own distinctive position in a gradual process of
development in the language, which, beginning in the earliest times,
has lasted down to the present day. Late Greek has stripped off much
that was customary in the earlier period, and it contains germs of
future developments destined to be completed in modern Greek. We
may, then, speak of a certain peculiarity and uniformity in original
‘Bible’ Greek, but solely as opposed to earlier or later phases of
the history of the language, not as opposed to ‘profane’ Greek.”[6]
It was through the conquests of Alexander that the ways were made
clear and wide for this later form of the Greek language, this
Hellenistic Greek, to find an opening in all directions, and to
be employed as a common means of communication in ever-increasing
measure. Close upon the soldiers followed the merchants, nor did
it take long before colonists came and settled down in the newly
conquered territories; and when once colonies of Greek-speaking
people were established, teachers soon came and took up their
abode in the new settlements. New Greek cities thus arose in which
practically only Greek was spoken; with the employment of this
language it followed in a natural course that the influence of the
Greek spirit, and with it Greek forms of thought and Greek ideals,
made itself felt. In this way Alexander’s ambition was attained;
for his ideal was not only to conquer lands; he desired also that
the hearts and minds of men should be brought under the domination
of that Greek culture which was destined to affect the religion,
the philosophy, the literature and the art of mankind for all time.
Alexander was a worthy pupil of his great teacher, Aristotle.
It is, perhaps, not always sufficiently realized that the Hellenistic
Movement coincided to a large extent with an epoch which was in some
notable respects one of dissolution. In the domain of learning, for
example, the older Greek idea of the possibility of a single mind
assimilating the whole content of knowledge had been discarded; for
it had come to be seen that the sum of knowledge in its manifold
ramifications was far too great to be acquired by any one man,
however learned, and that specialists must devote themselves to
different departments of learning. Hence arose the grammarian as
well as the rhetorician, the historian as well as the mathematician,
while the philosopher occupied his special position.[7] The scholar,
therefore, who desired to gain some insight into more than one of the
various branches of knowledge no longer went, as in earlier days,
to one teacher who was supposed to possess encyclopædic learning,
but he studied under a grammarian in order to learn grammar, under
a rhetorician in order to learn rhetoric, under a philosopher in
order to learn philosophy, and so on. This newer system had already
forced itself to the front some time before the actual period with
which we are dealing; there are clear indications in the methods
and teaching of Plato, to say nothing of Aristotle and his pupils,
of an increasing tendency of making wider differentiation between
the various sciences, and of dividing them up into their various
groups. Philosophy stands alone; the exact sciences go each along
the line of their own development. What was thus prepared by these
great philosophers and their followers was acted upon and greatly
developed during the Hellenistic period proper. Nowhere was this
more the case than in Alexandria, the city of Alexander’s founding.
It was in Alexandria that during the third century B.C. the exact
sciences reached the height of their development. All that was
acquired through the incentive given later by the study of the exact
sciences of antiquity during the Middle Ages through the medium of
Arabic translations, and during the _Renaissance_ by means of newly
discovered Greek originals of the ancient classics, was in the main
due to the achievements wrought during this epoch.[8] That Alexandria
should have been, during the Hellenistic period, the centre of this
intensive, intellectual activity will be seen to have been a fact of
great importance when we come to speak of this city as having been
also the centre of the Jewish Dispersion.
Alexandria[9] was, however, but the greatest example of many other
new cities founded by Alexander, or through his inspiration, while a
far greater number which were already in existence were hellenized
through his instrumentality. With regard to these latter a fact
of great importance must be noted; one effect of the entry of
Hellenistic influence into the civic life of the “barbarians” was
that the Greek came to know and understand his fellow-creatures of
other nationalities; he saw that those whom he had always been taught
to despise as not much better than semi-civilized savages, also had
their forms of culture which likewise boasted of a hoary antiquity.
The Greeks were, therefore, led to study the methods of thought, the
customs and the beliefs of these “barbarians,” with the result that
contempt was turned to admiration, and the Greeks came to regard
the “barbarians” as brothers. Cynic and Stoic philosophers, “the
Rousseaus of Hellenism” as Krüger very happily calls them, spoke of
and taught a brotherhood of man, a new and wonderful thing; and a
cosmopolitanism, hitherto unheard of, came into being.
But if the mingling together of Greek and “barbarian” was the
means of creating a cosmopolitanism, in the best sense, no less
characteristic of the Hellenistic period is the fact that the
importance of the individual came to be recognized. The Hellenization
of “barbarian” cities, referred to just now, meant that these
attained to a state of semi-independence; in all cases of this kind
the local government of the city was framed on the Greek model; the
part which the people took in the political assemblies and in the
annual elections had the natural effect of making them feel that they
had a real interest and a definite part to play in the administration
of affairs. It is easy to understand how the result of this was
the emphasizing of the importance of each individual. Where the
individual, while claiming and exercising his rights of citizenship,
does not lose sight of his responsibilities, an ideal combination is
offered. This individualism of the true and genuine type the Greeks
gave to the world; it is an example of the sense of proportion which
was a peculiarly Hellenic _trait_. During the Hellenistic period,
therefore, individualism came to its own.
Not unconnected with this subject of individualism was the
philosophical teaching of the Hellenistic period. The main interest
in the philosophical systems of this time centred in ethics; and
ethical teaching concerns the individual first and foremost. It was
the ethical system of the Stoics[10] to which was primarily due
the emphasis laid on the conception of law and duty; virtue is the
only good, they taught, vice the only evil; all else is indifferent.
Moreover, Hellenistic philosophy set before men the ideal of wisdom;
the highest attainment for mortals, so it was taught, was that they
should become wise men. It was a noble picture that was depicted,
even though the Stoic ideal was unattainable, of the free and
independent and self-reliant individual who, through the wisdom that
he has acquired, stands towering above his fellows, though not in
aloofness, but as a helper. It has been pointed out with justice
that it is the stress laid on the importance of the individual which
largely accounts for the numerous striking personalities, both men
and women, who come before us during the Hellenistic period. The
historian Polybius (born about B.C. 204) was the first to recognize
the importance of the individual as a factor in the course and
development of history. It is during this period especially that
great individuals appear as the pivots of history. Now, too, for the
first time, biography becomes a science; delineation of character,
the motives of individual action, and psychological analysis of the
heart and mind are now regarded as indispensable for the proper
understanding of men and their doings.[11]
Whether in politics, or science, or philosophy, or literature, or
in estimating their fellow-creatures, the Greeks offer a remarkable
example of the determination to see men and things in the world
around them as they really are; their instinctive critical faculty
made them _realists_. Nothing must be taken for granted, all things
must be tested by the light of reason; only so can the reality
of things be ascertained. “The critical faculty, the reason—in
one light it appears as the _sense of proportion_; the sense of
proportion in politics, ‘common sense,’ balance of judgement; the
sense of proportion in behaviour, which distinguishes what is seemly
for the occasion and the person concerned; the sense of proportion in
art, which eliminates the redundant and keeps each detail in its due
subordination to the whole. How prominent this aspect of the critical
faculty was with the Greeks their language itself shows; _reason_ and
_proportion_ are expressed by a common word. ‘The Hellenes,’ Polybius
says, ‘differ mainly in this respect from other men, that they keep
to _what is due_ in each case.’”[12]
Important as it is to gain some little insight into Hellenism in its
secular aspect so that one may realize to some extent the nature of
the influence which it had upon the world, it is still more important
for our present purpose to consider it from the religious point of
view. To this we must now devote some little attention.
II. HELLENISM IN ITS RELIGIOUS ASPECT
It has already been pointed out that the Hellenistic Movement
coincided with an epoch which was in many respects one of
dissolution; this is distinctly the case in the domain of religion.
The history of religion offers numerous examples of the fact that
there arrive certain periods in which, for one reason or another,
the traditional form of faith ceases to exercise its power over
large sections of the people. One of two things then follows: either
religion gives place to scepticism, or else the old belief is adapted
to the altered spiritual and intellectual conditions which have
supervened. Among the Greeks of this period we find both processes at
work, though a downright atheistic position is the exception. Indeed,
one of the most interesting and significant facts in this connexion
is that the philosophy of the Hellenistic period, in spite of its
critical attitude towards religious beliefs, very soon developed into
theology. That is sufficient to show that, while there was a tendency
in certain circles to pour scorn on religion, the Hellenistic period
was very far from being one of irreligion.
The attitude of the cultured classes towards the national religion
differed, of course, from that of the masses; the critical spirit and
biting sarcasm of the philosophers, a great deal of which was wholly
justified, had the effect of making it impossible for educated people
to accept the old beliefs in the way in which this had been done
hitherto. The religious ideas taught by the philosophers were, in the
main, altogether subversive of those which tradition had handed down;
nevertheless, to the cultured it would have come as a relief to be
taught, as was done by the Epicuræans for example, that a man was not
godless because he destroyed belief in the popular gods, but that the
godless man was he who imputed to the gods the popular conceptions
concerning them.[13] Not that the Epicuræans were irreligious;
Epicurus[14] did not attack the belief in the gods as such; on the
contrary, he believed in them himself, and regarded the universality
of this belief as a proof that they actually existed. But he refused
to share the general ideas about them in their relation to the world,
and taught that their interference in the affairs of men was a thing
not to be thought of since nothing could be worse for men than to
feel that at every turn they might be hampered in their doings by the
gods. That Epicurus strenuously combated the fatalistic theory of the
Stoics can be readily understood. What he desired above all things
to do was to free men from the fear of the gods; belief in them, he
taught, was necessary for the fulness of happiness ultimately to be
enjoyed in their presence; but there was nothing in them to be afraid
of.
One of the very important things which philosophy did for religion
in this age was that it allegorized, and gave a new meaning to, the
ancient myths,[15] and thereby made them of practical religious
value at a time when the new mental outlook would otherwise have
necessitated the discarding altogether of both the substance and
form of the traditional beliefs. As it was, the time-honoured myths
were not rejected in spite of the awakening to new methods of
thought and of ever-increasing enlightenment; this clearer mental
atmosphere had the effect of transforming the essence of those myths,
while retaining their form. To give detailed examples of the way
in which this transformation was carried out cannot be undertaken
here, it would carry us too far afield; but reference may be made
to Wendland’s work (pp. 115-127) already referred to, and Usener’s
_Götternamen_, where much interesting information can be obtained;
references to the original authorities are given in abundance,
especially in the last-named book.
But the most striking factor, in the domain of religion, of the
Hellenistic Movement is the _religious syncretism_, which was so
profoundly characteristic of this period. Within the wide circle of
Hellenized cities and states a variety of nationalities, eastern as
well as western, were represented; and just as the inhabitants of
these had become united and had learned to live at peace with one
another, so did the various and numerous national deities come to be
regarded not only with tolerance, but also with favour by men to whom
they had hitherto been unknown.
The intermingling of races brought about the intermingling of
beliefs. Wonderfully illustrative of this are the religious
associations which formed the characteristic type of religion
during the Hellenistic period; and it is a striking fact that
among the members of these religious associations or guilds not
only Greeks, but foreigners, and these to a preponderating degree,
belonged.[16] While, undoubtedly, politics had a good deal to do with
the furtherance of religious syncretism,[17] its main motive-power
was the piety of individuals. With the knowledge of the existence
of hitherto unknown gods and goddesses came also the desire to do
homage to them; probably there was also the conviction among many
that, unless these newly found deities were duly honoured, evil
consequences would ensue. The desire to pay fitting honour to a god
is shown by the numerous attributive names which were frequently
addressed to him by his devotees; and in order to make up for any
unconscious omission the suppliant would add: “Or by whatever other
title thou desirest to be called.” Altars were also frequently
dedicated “to unknown gods,” lest a worshipper should bring down
upon himself the wrath of some deities of whose existence he was
unaware.[18]
The results of this religious syncretism, which was brought about
by the Hellenistic spirit, were far-reaching in their effect; thus,
as an example, it is worth mentioning that a type of monotheism
was taught; this centred in the cult of Tyche, an all-pervading
Fate; and though very inferior to the monotheism of the Jews, it
showed, nevertheless, that the religious instinct was becoming more
expansive and was asserting itself in a more rational way than had
hitherto obtained outside of Judaism. Nor must we forget to add that
with the higher conception of the Deity, of which this was a symptom,
there arose among the more deeply religiously-minded a longing for
fellowship with God, together with the inevitable consequence, a more
developed belief in the future life.
The Hellenistic Movement, therefore, considered at its best, and
apart altogether from the point of view of pure culture, constituted
an immense stride forward in the enlargening and development of
religious thought and belief. It is difficult to exaggerate its
importance for, and effect upon, religion, and therefore upon all
religious literature, during the period which we specially have in
view. Of this we shall have more to say in estimating the influence
and effect of Hellenism upon the Jews and their religion.
SUMMARY
The roots of the Hellenistic Movement must be sought in the
conditions brought about by the rise of the Attic sea-power. The
way was thus prepared for the victories of Alexander the Great,
with whose name the spread of the Hellenistic Movement is more
particularly associated, by his father, Philip; it was through the
exertions of the latter that the Macedonian Empire was consolidated.
The influence of Hellenism was, in the first instance, exercised by
means of the spread of the Greek language; but it was a form of Greek
which differed in many particulars from classical Greek, and is known
nowadays by the name of Hellenistic Greek. This is the language in
which the Septuagint and the New Testament are written; but it would
be a mistake to speak of it as “Biblical Greek,” because it was in
no sense used specifically for the Greek of the Bible, but was the
ordinary language used in every-day intercourse, and was developed
from the older form of Greek. Its wide prevalence is proved by the
discovery of great numbers of _papyri_ and _ostraka_ on which this
newer form of Greek occurs.
The Hellenistic Movement coincided with an epoch which was, in many
respects, one of dissolution, so that its influence began to spread
at a time when men’s minds would be likely to welcome its newer and
broader outlook upon the world.
The greatest centre of Hellenistic culture was Alexandria; but this
was only one, though the most striking, example of the Hellenization
that was going on in many other cities. The Hellenization of these
cities meant that their civic government was framed upon the Greek
model; “barbarians” and Greeks thus found themselves politically upon
an equality, and the knowledge of one another brought about in this
way resulted in the existence of a cosmopolitanism which was new to
the world.
On the other hand, the directly personal part which each individual
felt that he had to take as a citizen in the administration of
affairs, emphasized his importance, and this was one of the
contributing causes which made individualism a characteristic of
the Hellenistic period. Individualism was fostered, further, by the
philosophical systems of this period which centred in ethics; for
ethical teaching concerns the individual first and foremost.
The influence of Hellenism was seen in politics, science, philosophy
and literature. The critical faculty of the Greeks made them
realists. In their estimate of men and things the Greeks were guided
by an innate and strongly marked sense of proportion.
In the domain of religion it is to be noted, first, that Hellenistic
philosophy soon developed into theology; the Hellenistic period was,
therefore, not one of irreligion. But the critical attitude of the
philosophers towards the traditional religion made it impossible, at
any rate for the cultured classes, to believe in it as heretofore.
It was, however, all to the good that the essence of the ancient
myths was transformed while their form was retained. Another and
most important fact to be noted is the religious syncretism which
was a characteristic of this period; the intermingling of races
brought about the intermingling of worship. The Hellenistic Movement
was the means of a great development of religious thought; and the
resultant effect on the religious literature of the age is difficult
to exaggerate.