Miracle workers of various types

AIU/NEGST Tony Wilmot Memorial Library catalog » Details for: Theio... interpretative background of the miracle traditions used by Mark / Normal view MARC view 17-09-16 10:36 ISBD view Theios aner and the Markan miracle traditions : a critique of the theios aner concept as an interpretative background of the miracle traditions used by Mark / [Text] by Blackburn, Barry. Type: 3 :# Series: Wissenschaftliche untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament ; 40 Publisher: De Mohr Description ISBN: Subject(s} Jesus Christ -- Miracles Bible. N.T Mark - - Criticism, interpretation. etc Mi-acie workers Divorce — United Stales Tags from this library: Item : type : Location ELA AIU/NEGST - Tony Books General Stacks Collection Wilmot Memorial Library General Circulation Call number Copy Status BT 375.2 .B53 1991 Copy Available (Browse shelf) 1 Date due | Koh 2 “ ine che workers Apo mn A an oe pp 2-53 of wares Amr À 75-75 pre p $S - au verder of( http://library.africainternational.edu/cgi-bin/koha/opac-detail.pl?biblionumber=8745 Pagina 1 van 1

came to be regarded by some as Zeus'**. In fact, even Menecrates himself succumbed to the idea and had the audacity to make such a claim before Philip of Macedon and the Spartan king Archidamus!!*, He certainly dressed the part, adorning himself “in purple, with a gold crown on his head and carrying a sceptre, his feet shod with slippers”’116, 5. Pyrrhus Pyrrhus is the sole example of a Hellenistic king who was reputed to have possessed miraculous powers. Plutarch says that Pyrrhus had the power to heal swollen spleens by sacrificing a white cock and pressing his right foot against the spleen!!”. The use of the right foot is no doubt connected to the further tradition that the big toe of his right foot possessed 8 úvauv deiav, “so that after the rest of his body had been consumed, this was found to be untouched and unharmed by the fire’’’®. As a yepas for his healings Pyrrhus would gladly accept the sacrificial cock!!?; this suggests “that the true believers put him on a level with Asclepius on the basis of this power”!?°® Indeed, since a cock was the most common sacrifice to Asclepius, the phrase “a cock to Asclepius” became almost proverbial??*, C. Miracle Workers of Various Types 1. Amphion According to traditional chronology, Amphion, son of Zeus and An- Pre-Christian Divine Miracle Workers 29 charmed the rocks to form themselves into the walls of Thebes'™*. According to a late report, Tiberias honored the sons of Antiope (Amphion and Zethus) as Dioscuroi by building two pillars for them!?*. 2. Calais and Zetes Just as the Argonauts were not devoid of seers, so they were not lacking in heroes who possessed other kinds of miraculous powers. The gift of flight belonged to Calais and Zetes, the sons of the wind god, Boreas, and Oreithyia!?®. Equipped with wings, they were able to chase away the Harpies that were tormenting the seer Phineus in exchange for his unerring counsel ?”. According to Apollonius Rhodius, one of the columns placed over their graves by Heracles was reputed to move whenever the north wind blew!?®. 3. Euphemus The Argonaut Euphemus, son of Poseidon!??, received from his father the ability to run over the sea without getting his feet wet!3°. 4. Periclymenus To Periclymenus, the son of Neleus and Chloris (Amphion’s daughter) and therefore the grandson of Poseidon’**, his grandfather gave the ability to transform himself into various creatures: bird, ant, bee, snake, and lion'!??, As an Argonaut he used this power in his battle with Heracles, who tiope'??, is the earliest of the miracle workers surveyed in this section. Like Orpheus, whom we will examine shortly, Amphion had the power to charm nature with his music. That he was able to charm animals to follow him is not unknown'”’, but his sole specific miracle occurred when he 114 Ephippus, Frag. 17 (Theodor Kock, ed., Comicorum Atticorum Fragmenta [=CAF], vol. 2 [Leipzig: B. G. Teubner, 1884]); Alexis, Frag. 136 (CAF, 2); Hegesander, Frag. 5 (FHG, 4); Plut. Ages. 21; idem Apophth. 191A; idem Apophth. Lac. 213A; Athen. 7. 289a—f; Clem. Al. Protr. 4. 54; Ael. Var. Hist. 12. 51. The three patients mentioned above plus an unknown one became Heracles, Hermes, Apollo, and Asclepius, respectively. 115 Hegesander, Frag. 5 (FHG, 4); Athen. 7. 289a—f; Ael. Var. Hist. 12. 51. In Plutarch (Ages. 21; Apophth. 191 A; Apophth. Lac. 213A) Agesilaus takes the place of Philip. 116 Athen. 7. 289c. 117 Plut. Pyrrh. 3.4. 118 Ibid, 3:5. 119 Ibid. 120 Tiede, Charismatic Figure, p. 91. 121 Edelstein and Edelstein, Asclepius, 2:189f. 122 Hom. Od. 11. 260-62; Sen. Her. Fur. 262f.; Apollod. Bibl. 3. 5. 5; 3. 10. 1; Paus. 2. 6. 4; Hygin. Fab. 7. 123 Eumelus, Frag. 12 (Kinkel); Verg. Fel. 2. 23f.; Paus. 9.5. 8. 124 Hes., Frag. 182 (Merkelbach and West); Eur. Phoen. 823f.; Ap. Rhod. Argon. 1, 740f.; Hor. Carm. 3. 11. 1f.; idem Ars P. 394—96; Prop. 1. 9. 10; Ovid Meta. 6. 177-79; Sen. Her. Fur. 262f.; idem Phoen. 566—70; Stat. Silv. 2. 2. 60-62; idem Theb. 4. 356-60; Dio Chrys. Or. 32. 62; Plut. Maxime Cum Principibus Philosopho Esse Disserendum 4 (779A); Apollod. Bibl. 3. 5.5; Paus. 2. 6.4; 6. 20. 18;9. 5. 7f.;9. 17. 7; Lucian Imag. 14; Philostr. Eld. Jmag. 1. 10. 125 Johannes Malalas Chronographia 10 (Dindorf, p. 234, lines 18-20). 126 Pind. Pyth. 4. 181-83; Ap. Rhod. Argon. 1. 211-13; Diod. Sic. 4. 43. 3; Ovid Meta. 6. 702— 13; Apollod. Bibl. 1.9. 16; 3.15. 2; Paus. 5.17.11; Hygin. Fab. 14, 19. 127 Pind. Pyth. 4. 181-83; Ap. Rhod. Argon. 1. 219—23; 2, 178-300, 426-36; Ovid Meta. 6.714— 18;. Apollod. Bibl. 1.9. 21; 3.15. 2; Hygin. Fab. 14, 19. The chasing of the Harpies was a popular motif on vases (cf. A. Rapp, “Boreaden,” in Roscher, 1:798f., and Frank Brommer, Vasenlisten zur griechischen Heldsage [Marburg: N. G. Elwert Verlag. 19602], p. 351). 128 Ap. Rhod. Argon. 1. 1296-1308. 129 Pind. Pyth. 4. 43-46; Ap. Rhod. Argon. 1. 179-—81;Paus. 5. 17. 9; Hygin. Fab. 14, 157. 130 Asclepiades in Schol. ad Pind. Pyth. 4. 61 and Tzetz. Schol. ad Lycoph. Alex. 886; Ap. Rhod. Argon. 1. 179—84; Hygin. Fab, 14. 131 Hom. Od. 11. 281—86; Hellanicus FGrHist 4F125; Asclepiades Tragilus FGrHist 12F21; Ap. Rhod. Argon. 1. 156; Diod. Sic. 4. 68. 6; Hygin. Fab. 14. 132 Hes., Frag. 33 (Merkelbach and West); Ap. Rhod. Argon. 1. 156—60; Philodemus De Pietate 128; Sen. Med. 634-36; Apollod. Bibl. 1. 9. 9; 2. 7. 3. Therefore Euphorion, Frag. 77 (August Meineke, ed., De Euphorionis Chalcidensis Vita et Scriptis [Gedani: J. C. Albert, 1823]), compared Periclymenus to Proteus.

nevertheless proved capable of destroying his gifted foe!*?. Explicit references to Periclymenus’ superhuman status are rare: (1) Seneca calls him “Neptune’s son” (but probably not intending to deny the intermediate ancestor, Neleus), and (2) there was a Periclymenus, the son of Poseidon and Chloris, who was probably originally identical with Neleus’ son!?*. Thus the miracle-working Periclymenus may have sometimes passed as a son of Poseidon/Neptune. 5. Orpheus The Thracian Orpheus, also an Argonaut according to some versions, was among the most popular of the early Greeks credited with supernatural powers. The miraculous powers attributed to this figure revolve around his reputation as the singer and musician par excellence. Numerous authorities, classical and Hellenistic, relate how Orpheus, by singing and playing (the lute, lyre, or cithara), could charm animate and even inanimate nature'”°. Most frequently they claim that Orpheus’ music charmed the rocks and trees to follow him. He also charmed and attracted both tame and wild animals. Even the elements were subject to his magic: he exercised control over wind, hail, snow, seas, and particularly, rivers!°$ While most of the references to Orpheus’ powers over nature do not narrate any particular incident, the tradition does know three occasions on which his power manifested itself. Entering Hades alive to retrieve his dead wife, Eurydice, Orpheus charmed both the inhabitants and the ruler, Pluto, and thereby gained permission to take Eurydice back to the upper air provided that he not look back at her until they reached their destination'*’, Twice during the Argonauts’ expedition Orpheus’ music proved 133 Hes., Frag. 33 (Merkelbach and West); Ovid Meta. 12. 556-72; Apollod. Bibl. 1. 9. 9; Nonnus Dion. 43. 247-49. According to Hygin. Fab. 10, Periclymenus escaped Heracles by changing into an eagle. 134 (1): Sen. Med. 635f.; (2): K. Scherling, “Periklymenos,” in PW, 19:792f. 135 Simonides, Frag. 384 (Page); Eur. Bacch. 560-64; idem Jph. Aul, 1211f.; Ap.Rhod. Argon. 1, 26~31, 569-79; Anthologia Graeca 7. 8f.; Agatharchides De Mari Erythraeo 7 (Karl Müller, ed., 2. 3-6; Ovid Meta. 10. Geographi Graeci Minores, vol. 1 [Paris: Firmin Didot, 1855]); Diod. Sic. 4. 25. 2; 37. 30. 2; Verg. Cul. 117f., 278-82; idem Georg. 4. 507-10; idem Eel. 6. 30; Conon Narr., FGrHist 26F1. 45. 3; Hor. Carm. 1. 12. 3-12: 3. 11. 13f.; Prop. 2. 13. 5f.; 3. Dio Chrys. Or. 32. 62E: 86-108; Manilius Astron. 5. 326-28; Sen. Med. 228f.; 625~29; idem Her. Fur. 572-74; idem Her. Oet. 1031—60; Mela De Chorographia 2. 28; Quint. Inst. 1. 10. 9; coins and art objects is supplied by W. K. C. Guthrie, Orpheus and Greek Religion (London: 35. 9; Philostr. Eld. /mag. 2. 15; Philostr. Jr. Imag. 6; Callistratus Descript. 7; Claudian Raptus Proserpinae 2 (Praef.). 1-8, 13-28; Carminum Minorum 18. 19f. Additional evidence from Methuen & Co., 19527), p. 21, and plates 1 and 15. 136 Ap. Rhod. Argon. 1. 26f.; Anthologia Graeca 7. 8; Verg. Cul, 117f., 278; Hor. Carm. 1. 12. 10; 3. 11. 14; Prop. 3. 2; Manilius Astron. 5. 326f.; Sen. Med. 625-27; idem Her. Fur. 573; idem Her. Oet. 1037. 137 Especially Verg. Cul. 2368-93; idem Georg. 4. 454-503; Ovid Meta. 10. 1-73; Sen. Her. Fur. 56989; idem Her. Oet. 1061—89. Also Eur. Alc. 357-62; Isoc. Or. 11. 8; Moschus Epitaphium Pre-Christian Divine Miracle Workers 31 very beneficial: (1) he ended a quarre l among the Argon auts by soothing their wrath, and (2) he enabled his ship to evade the alluring Sirens, breaking their spell by the sound of his lyre?34. Although strictly A passage from Dionysius Scytob rachio n used by Diodorus Siculus relates how Orpheus twice saved his ship from the peril of storm by offering up the proper prayers to the gods of Samothrace!2?. speaking Orpheus does not perform a miracl e — the actual saviors are gods — the first of these two stories constitutes perhap s the closest parallel between Jesus’ calming of the wind and waves (Mk. 4:35~41) and a similar tale with a miracle-working divine man as its subject: But there came on a great storm and the chieftains had given up hope of being saved, when Orpheus, they say, who was the only one on shipboard who had ever been initiated in the mysteries of the deities of Samothrace , offered to these’ deities the prayers for their salvation (owrnplac). And immediately (eùBúc) the wind died down and two stars fell over the heads of the. Dioscori, and the whole company was amazed (€kmAay vat) at the marvel which had taken place and concluded that they had been rescued from their perils by an act of Providence of the gods. according The final singing miracle of Orpheus occurred after the Maenads of Thrace dismembered his body; his head, singing as it went, was swept away by the river Hebrus’*°. It eventually arrived at Lesbos where, !*3, to Philostratus, it became a source of oracles!! . Perhaps this tradition is connected with the occasionally expressed opinion that Orpheus was a Ê seer!*?. It is unanimously held that Orpheus was the son of the Muse Calliope 6. 119f.; Hor. Carm. 3.11. 17-24; Conon Narr., . . Ti 5 Occasionally Apollo is P called his father 144 , but it is doubtful whether this was understood in more than a metaphorical sense!*°; normally Oeagrus N : 6 : is his father'*°, Athenaeus classes Orpheus among 7 the demigods (1/0 eo), Bionis 12326; Diod. Sic. 4. 25. 4; Verg. Aen. a falsehood. For extra-literary evidence of FGrHist 26F1. 45. 2; Manilius Astron. 5. 328; Stat. Theb. 8. 57-79; Plut. Ser. Num. Pun. 28 (S66B); idem Amat. 17 (761F); Apollod, Bibl. 1. 3. 2; Lucian Dial. Mort. 23 (28LCL). 3; Athen. 13. 597b-c. Paus. 9. 30. 4, 6 dismisses this story as Al. Strom. 1. 21. 134. 4; is much older than Philostratus. this tradition in antiquity see Konrat Ziegler, “Orpheus,” in PW, 18:1279—80. 138 (1): Ap. Rhod. Argon. 1. 492-518; (2): ibid., 4. 904-9; Sen. Med. 355-60; Apollod. Bibl. 1. 9.25. 139 Dionysius Scytobrachion FGrHist 32F14 (Diod. Sic. 4. 43. 1f., 48, 5f.). 140 Lucian Ind. 11; cf. also Ovid Meta. 11. 50-60. 141. Philostr. Her. 5. 3; Vit. Ap. 4, 14, However, the evidence from art presented by Guthrie, Orpheus, pp. 36—39 and plate 5, proves that some such tradition 2. 684. 142 Perhaps Plat. Prot. 316D; certainly Pliny Hist. Nat. 7. 56. 203; Clem. Schol. ad Eur. Ale. 968; Schol. ad Ap. Rhod. Argon. origin. 143 Ap. Rhod. Argon. 1. 23f.; Antholog ia Graeca 7. 8f.; Verg. Ecl. 4. 55-57; Hor. Carm. 1.12. . 8-10; Sen. Med. 625; idem Her. Oet. 1034; Dio Chrys. Or. 78. 19; Callistratus Deseript. 7; Philostr. Jr. Jmag. 6. Paus. (9. 30. 4) acknowledges the tradition but believes it false. Quint. Unst. 1. 10. 9) simply notes that Orpheus was of divine 144 Pind. Pyth. 4. 176f.; Ovid Meta. 10. 167; Apollod, Bibl. 1.3.2. 145 See Ziegler, “Orpheus,” pp. 1217f. 146 Pind., Frag.139. 9 (LCL); Plat. Symp. 179D, etc.

those great figures of the heroic period who were superhuman in virtue of having enjoyed .a divine as well as a mortal parent *?. Inscriptions provide evidence that Orpheus enjoyed (hero?) worship in Maroneia'*® (1st cent. A.D.) and possibly in Sparta!*°. In the Italian town of Sena Orpheus was revered as a god: 'Oppeds Bede uv tis mörlews]..."°°. 6. Musaeus Closely related to Orpheus — sometimes regarded as his pupil!*! — is the mythical poet Musaeus. Like Orpheus, Musaeus’ mother is a supernatural being — in this case the goddess Selene'°?. Unlike Orpheus, however, little is told about his miraculous activity. Aristophanes presents Musaeus as one who taught “healing and oracle lore”'°?. Plato speaks of Orpheus, Musaeus and their sects, who disguised sophistry in “mystic rites and soothsayings (xpnouwôtas)’!%. Finally, Pausanias mentions a verse, of which he believes Onomacritus to be the author, which revealed that the North Wind endowed Musaeus with the gift of flight *s, 7. Abaris Like the O.T. priest Melchizedek, Abaris the Hyperborean makes his literary appearances, “without father or mother or genealogy, and has neither beginning of days nor end of life.” This priest of the Hyperborean won fame through several miraculous feats. He acquired the nickname ai0poBärns, “air-walker,’” “because, riding on the arrow given him by the Hyperborean Apollo, he crossed rivers and seas and impassible places, somehow walking on the air”'°®, Abaris was also a successful udvrıs, able 147 Athen. 14. 632c. 148 J. A. R. Munro, “Epigraphical Notes from Eastern Macedonia and Thrace,” JHS 16 (1896): 321. 150 CIG, 3, no. 5970. 149 CIG, 1, no. 1446; C. Tsountas, “Ek rod ’AuvkAalov, "Ednuepis 'Apxatokoyukn (1892):20f. 151 Tatian. Ad. Gr. 41; Euseb. Praep. Evang. 10. 11. 30; Suda, “Movoatos.” 152 Plat. Resp. 2. 7 (364E); Philochorus FGrHist 328F208. According to Hermesianax, Frag. 2 (Ernst Diehl, ed., Anthologia Lyrica Graeca, vol. 2, BSGRT [Leipzig: B. G. Teubner, 1925]) he is the son of Mnvns. His father is usually Eumolpus (Philochorus FGrHist 328F 208; Diog. Laert. Prooem. 1. 3), but others say. Antiphemus (Andron FGrHist 10F 13; Suda, “Movoalos”) or even Orpheus (Diod. Sic. 4. 25). 154 Plat. Prot. 316D. The various oracles attributed to Musaeus were collected by Onomacritus, but 153 Aristoph. Ran. 1033. Cf. Pliny Hist. Nat. 21.21. he was banished from Athens by Hipparchus when it was discovered that he had inserted some of his own oracles (Aristoph. Ran. 1033; Hdt. 7. 6; 8. 96; Paus. 1.22. 7;10.9. 11). 155 Paus. 1. 22.7. 156 Nicomachus in Porph. Vit. Pyth. 28 and lamb. Vit. Pyth. 135;Iamb. Vit. Pyth. 91. 157 Harp., “"Afapics.” 158 Nicomachus in Porph. Vit, Pyth. 29 and lamb. Vit. Pyth. 136 (trans. of Porphyry by M. Smith Pre-Christian Divine Miracle Workers 33 to predict earthquakes and plagues'*”. Apollonius the Paradoxographer (citing Bolus) tells how he prevented a plague in Lacedaemon by prescribing an averting sacrifice!f®, Similarly Nicomachus says that Pythagoras taught Abaris, along with Empedocles and Epimenides, how to perform feats similar to his own, i.e., predicting earthquakes, averting plagues, and subduing winds, hailstorms, and waters'‘', The latter feats, which exceed mere prediction, may be compared to the charms of Abaris (apparently for restoring health) mentioned by Plato’®?. Finally, at least twice it is mentioned that Abaris engaged in a continual fast !°?, The tradition neither assigns Abaris a divine mother or father nor in any other way explicitly reflects on his nature, but it is clear that he was a Hyperborean'‘®. Pindar says that the Hyperboreans, a legendary tribe living far north of Greece, were a “chosen (iepd) people” among whom “neither sickness nor baneful eld mingleth”!6s. Whether this means that they were immortal'®*, or only that they lived extremely long lives!®, they were undoubtedly regarded as a race superior to ordinary mortals. 8. Aristeas of Proconnesus Like Abaris, Aristeas of Proconnesus was a Wundermann closely associated with Apollo. Concerning this figure, whom the Suda dates in the sus and Cyzicus: sixth century B.C.'68 Herodotus records a local tradition from Proconne- Harper & Row, Publishers, 1965], p. 117). Cf. lamb. Vit. Pyth, 91, 140. The same tradition is in Moses Hadas and Morton Smith, Heroes and Gods, Religious Perspectives, 13 [New York: found earlier in Heraclid. Pont., Frag. 51c (Fritz Wehrli, ed., Die Schule des Aristoteles [= Wehrli], vol. 7: Herakleides Pontikos [Basel: Benno Schwabe & Co., 1953]), and later in the Suda, ““ABapts.” That Abaris carried Apollo’s arrow is attested in Hdt. 4. 36 and Lycurg., Frag. 85 Pyth. 93 and (N. C. Conomis, ed., Lycurgus Oratio in Leocratem [= Conomis], BSGRT [Leipzig: B. G. Teubner, 1970]). 159 Lycurg., Frag. 85 (Conomis); Apollonius Para. Mir. 4. According to Iamb. Vit. 147, Pythagoras taught Abaris how to divine through numbers rather than the entrails of animals. 160 Apollonius Para. Mir. 4. Cf. lamb. Vit. Pyth, 92, 141. 161 Nicomachus in Porph. Vit. Pyth. 29 and Iamb. Vit. Pyth. 135; in chapter 91 Iamblichus states that Abaris used Apollo’s arrow to control the elements and to avert pestilence. 162 Plat. Charm, 158B. Schol. ad Aristoph. Eq. 729 mentions oracles attributed to Abaris. Heraclides Ponticus’ book about Abaris mentioned by Plut. Quomodo adul. 1 (14E). 163 Hdt. 4. 36; lamb. Vit. Pyth. 141. Some of Abaris’ miraculous exploits were no doubt related in 164 Hdt. 4. 36; Lycurg., Frag. 85 (Conomis); Plat. Charm. 158B; Apollonius Para. Mir. 4; Nicomachus in Porph. Vit. Pyth. 28 and Iamb. Vit. Pyth. 135; lamb. Vit. Pyth. 90, 140f.; Harp., “"Aßapıs”; Suda, ‘‘’ABapis.” 165 Pind. Pyth. 10. 41f. Strab. 166 Frank Nisetich, ed., Pindar’s Victory Songs (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1980), 15. 1. 57 (711) assigns them a life span of 1000 years, p. 214. 167 Lewis Farnell, The Works of Pindar, 3 vols. (London: Macmillan and Co., 1932), 2:218. 168 Suda, “'Aptoréas.” Strab. 14. 1. 18 (639) preserves the notion that Aristeas was Homer’s teacher.

Pre-Christian Divine Miracle Workers believe to be a god !#!. timus, like’ Abaris and Aristeas, as a miracle worker whom men did not the divine Pythagoras'®® On the other hand, Celsus can appeal to Hermosoul journeys came to an abrupt halt, however, when Hermotimus’ enemies, aided by his wife, burned his body while his soul was abroad’”*. Apollonius the Paradoxographer and Tertullian say that Clazomenae honored Hermotimus with a temple after his death’. Hermotimus’ superhuman status is also indicated in the tradition that regards him as a prior incarnation of visited a new place he would predict various natural catastrophes'””. These 35 The Miracle-Working ®eioı 'Avôpes of Hellenism death being now spread about in the city, it was disputed by a man of Cyzicus, who... said that he had met Aristeas going towards Cyzicus and spoken with him. While he vehemently disputed the kinsfolk of the dead man had come to the fuller’s shop . .. ; but when the house shut his workshop and went away to tell the dead man’s kinsfolk, and the report of Aristeas’ It is said that this Aristeas .. . went into a fuller’s shop at Proconnesus and there died; the fuller 9. Hermotimus of Clazomenae Hermotimus of Clazomenae, like Aristeas, was able to send his soul on long journeys during which he would witness events in remote places'”®. The only pre-Christian evidence for this tradition relates that when his soul teas appeared at Proconnesus and made that which the Greeks now call the Arimaspea, after was opened there was no Aristeas there, dead or alive. But in the seventh year after that Ariswhich he vanished once again16° But this was not the end of Aristeas’ activities. Herodotus adds a Metapontine tradition to the effect that 240 years after the second disappearance of Aristeas he appeared at Metapontum and commanded its citizens to establish an altar for Apollo, beside which they were to erect a statue bearing Aristeas’ name!”®. The reason: “Apollo had come to their country alone of all Italiot lands, and he himself — who was now Aristeas, but then when he followed the god had been a crow — had come with him.’ According to Apollonius the Paradoxographer, Aristeas, after his death in Procon- 10. Epimenides Moving from Asia Minor to Crete, we encounter Epimenides, whose life provides the locus for several marvels. Especially distinctive was his nap In Herodotus and Apollonius the various appearances seem to be postnesus, made numerous appearances over a long period of time in Sicily '”\, mortem; later traditions, however, relate how Aristeas’ body would fall were fearing a Persian assault, he assured them that it would not come j | that he slept for around 183 Xenophanes, Frag. 20 (Hermann Diels and Walther Kranz,eds., Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker [= DK], vol. 1 [Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung, 1934]); Phlegon FGrHist 257F38; Diog. Laert. 1. 111. 184 Plat. Leg. 1. 642D-E. 185. Plut. Sol. 12; Diog. Laert. 1. 114. 186 Diog. Laert. 1. 115. Arist. Rhet. 3. 17. 10 (1418a), however, says that Epimenides divined not the future, but obscure things of the past. fifty years. 181: Origen c. Cels. 3. 32. 182 Apollonius Para. Mir. 1; Diog. Laert. 1. 109. Tert. De Anim. 44 knows Suda, “hön.”” 179 Apollonius Para. Mir. 3; Tert. De Anim. 44. 180 Heraclid. Pont., Frag. 89 (Wehrli); Tert. De Anim. 28; Diog. Laert. 8. 5; Porph. Vit. Pyth. 45; Lucian Muse. Encon. 7; Tert. De Anim. 44. 177 Apollonius Para. Mir. 3. 178 See note 176. erect a statue in honor of Aristeas; he does not say that Aristeas is to be regarded as a god. 176 Apollonius Para. Mir. 3; Pliny Hist. Nat. 7. 52. 174; Plut. De gen. 22 (S92C-D) (Hermodorus); wick, ed., Origen: Contra Celsum [Cambridge: University Press, 1953]). In Hdt. 4. 15, Apollo only instructs the Metapontines to obey Aristeas’ command to build an altar for Apollo and to bring'**, and (2) he told the Lacedaemonians about their future defeat by the Arcadians’** As early as Plato, Epimenides was credited with having menides warned the Athenians of the woes that the Munichia would for ten years'**. Post-Christian texts provide two more examples: (1) Epiyears)'**. Epimenides was successful at prediction: when the Athenians are the various opinions as to the longevity of his life (154, 157, or 299 in a Cretan cave that lasted for fifty-seven years'®? Undoubtedly related into a death-like trance during which his soul would wander abroad “like a bird, surveying all beneath, land, sea, rivers, cities, nations of mankind, and occurrences and creatures of all sort’’’”*, Pliny says that “The soul of Aristeas . . . was seen flying from his mouth in Proconnesus in the form of Like Abaris, Aristeas is neither the son of a god nor a goddess, but there araven”'”?. temple and sacrificed to him as a hero”'”*. Celsus adds that Apollo comis some evidence of his heroic or divine status after death. Apollonius says that the Sicilians, in response to Aristeas’ appearances in Sicily, “built a manded the Metapontines to regard Aristeas as a god, but that rodrov 0 N r 5 obdeic Erı vouiter deov ”°®. 169 Hdt. 4. 14. The essence of this report (save the second appearance) is preserved in Plut. Rom. 28, where Aristeas is seen on his way to Croton instead of Cyzicus. Origen c. Cels. 3. 26 believes that this account was recorded by Pindar as well as by Herodotus. 172 Maximus Tyrius Dissertationes 10. 2. According to 38. 3c—f, Aristeas invented the device of 170 Hdt. 4. 15. This visit to Metapontum is also attested by Athen, 13. 605c (citing Theopompus FGrHist 115F248). 171 Apollonius Para. Mir. 2. 174 Apollonius Para. Mir. 2 (translated by Tiede, Charismatic Figure, p. 314). relating his soul’s travels to convince men that he was wise in spite of his lack of education. 173 Pliny Hist. Nat. 7. 52. 174. Cf. also the Suda, "”Apıoreas.” fact that Aristeas was a man, and perhaps not a good one, was more important than the oracle 175 Origen c. Cels. 3. 26. Origen explains (3. 29): “. . . the Metapontines thought that the obvious which pronounced him to be a god, or worthy of divine honours,” and “‘on this account they were not willing to obey Apollo, and thus no one thinks Aristeasa god” (trans. by Henry Chad-

never, therefore, seen eating **® produced some type of beneficial compound from certain herbs'*”, Perhaps this is related to the tradition first attested by Demetrius of Magnesia (ca. 50 B.C.) that the Nymphs gave Epimenides a special food to be consumed in small doses which would be completely absorbed by his body. He was In addition to the above-mentioned marvels, there are others found only in post-Christian texts. Nicomachus, who believes that Epimenides, Abaris, and Empedocles were Pythagoras’ disciples, says that the master taught them how to predict earthquakes, avert plagues, and subdue winds, hailbody ‘°°. storms, and waters!®® Diogenes Laertius records Epimenides’ claim that like Pythagoras “his soul had passed through many incarnations’’!?°, Iamblichus tells how he, upon the verge of being destroyed by enemies, invoked the Furies and avenging gods whereupon his enemies killed each other’®!. The Suda appears to assimilate Epimenides to Aristeas or Hermotimus when it speaks of his ability to send his soul on migrations from his Epimenides distinguishes himself from all the Wundermänner surveyed thus far in that he is the first to have been described, in so many words, as a Defoe ävrjp'’*. It may be confidently concluded, however, that Plato did not form this judgment on the basis of Epimenides’ paradoxical acts. Plutarch says that because of his mystical and divine wisdom in religious affairs “the men of his time said that he was the son of a nymph named Balte, and called him a new Cures’’™*, Finally, there is a passage in Diogenes Laertius which requires reproduction: Some writers say that the Cretans sacrifice to him [Epimenides] as a god (ws Gem); for they say that he had superhuman foresight. For instance, when he saw Munichia, at Athens, he said they would destroy it even if they had to do so with their teeth. And this he said so long before the Athenians did not know how many evils that place would bring upon them; for, if they did, the event. It is also stated that he was the first to call himself Aeacus [son of Zeus and Aegina] ; that he foretold to the Lacedaemonians their defeat by the Arcadians; and that he claimed that his soul had passed through many incarnations ‘95 187 Plat. Leg. 3. 677D. Cf. Theophr. Hist. Pl. 7. 12. 1, where “Epimenides” is the name of a certain plant whose roots are edible. 188 In Diog. Laert. 1. 114. Also Plut. Cony, sept. sap. 14 (157D). 189 In Porph. Vit. Pyth. 29 and lamb. Vit. Pyth. 135. 190 Diog. Laert. 1. 114. 191 Iamb. Vit. Pyth. 222. Pre-Christian Divine Miracle Workers 37 This block of material is noteworthy not only because it records the opinion that the Cretans worship Epimenides as a god, but also because of the way it explicitly grounds this estimate in his “superhuman foresight” and possibly also in two self-claims which cast a numinous aura about his person. Whether Diogenes created or has simply transmitted this unit, it has the appearance of an aretalogy in the sense of being a list of miracles and self-claims which substantiate the subject’s divine nature. A similar but more developed unit with Pythagoras as its subject will be seen directly. 11. Pythagoras The great but enigmatic Pythagoras, who flourished in the sixth century B.C.'?®, is, in the context of this study, the most important divine miracle worker of the pre-Christian era. Because of the quantity and significance of the various traditions about him, it will be necessary to examine them chronologically rather than topically. This will demand careful effort to identify the various sources used by the two Neoplatonic. biographers of Pythagoras: Porphyry and Iamblichus!?”. The earliest witnesses to Pythagoras’ superhuman power and divine status come from the late sixth and fifth centuries B.C. Epimenides, claims Apollonius of Tyana, believed that Pythagoras was the son of Apollo and Parthenis, a mortal'*® The earliest reference to Pythagoras’ supernatural knowledge is possibly found in the fragment of Xenophanes according to which an unnamed person [Pythagoras?] recognized the soul of a barking dog as that which had been previously incarnate in a human friend*°, Opuscula selecta, BSGRT (Leip- 196 “Da die antiken Nachrichte n über die Chronologi e des Lebens des P. ausserordentlich widerspruchsvoll sind,” the reader is directed to the discussion of Kurt von Fritz, “Pythagoras,” in PW, 24:179-87. 197 The critical texts are found in Augustus Nauck, ed., Porphyrius zig: B. G. Teubner, 1886), pp. 17-52, and Ludwig Deubner, ed., /amblichi: De Vita Pythagorica Liber, BSGRT (Stuttgart: B. G. Teubner, 1975). Unless otherwise stated, Eng. transand Smith, Heroes and Gods, pp. 107-28; unless indicated otherwise, translations of Iamblichus will be those of Thomas Taylor, lations of Porphyry will be those of Morton Smith in Hadas ed, Jamblichus’ Life of Pythagoras (London: N.p., 1818). 198 lamb. Vit. Pyth. 7. According to the parallel passage in Porph. Vit. Pyth. 2, this material was by Apollonius. derived from an Apollonius who wrote On Pythagoras. Porphyry’s text, however, does not mention Epimenides, Eudoxus and Xenocrates as advocates of the Apolline paternity of Pythagoras, and therefore this element of the tradition may not have been mediated with the wonder-worker of E. Minar, Jr. [Cambridge, Mass.: and enthusiastic Pytha- Tyana . . . has probability on its side” since “Apollonius was a conscious Most, like W. Burkert, believe that “The identity of this Apollonius 192 Suda, “Emwevlôns.” 193 Plat. Leg. 1. 642D. 199 Xenophanes DK 21B7. chatel, 9 (Neuchâtel: Fac. des Lettres, 1922). p.91. gorean” (Lore and Science in Ancient Pythagoreanism, trans. 194 Plut. Sol. 12. The Curetes were the divine (Hes., Frag. 123 [Merkelbach and West] calls them Harvard University Press, 1972], p. 100, n. 10). But cf. Georges Méautis, Recherches sur le pythagorisme, Recueil de travaux publiés par la Faculté des Lettres de l’Université de NeuGeo) or semi-divine inhabitants of Crete who protected Zeus during his infancy. Epimenides as one of the Curetes is also attested by Myronianus (in Diog. Laert. 1. 115). 195 Diog. Laert. 1. 114.

‘whenever he [Pythagoras?] reached out with all his thoughts, easily he From the same general period comes the assertion of Empedocles, that saw each of the things that are, in ten and even twenty generations of men’’?°°, This is commonly interpreted to mean that Pythagoras remembered the former incarnations of his soul”°* That Pythagoras was Apollo’s son and that he remembered his soul’s prior incarnations are likewise confirmed by fourth-century authorities. Again, according to Apollonius of Tyana, Eudoxus and Xenocrates followed Epimenides’ judgment that Apollo himself had impregnated Parthepear °° Pre-Christian Divine Miracle Workers 39 1. Pythagoras’ disciples regarded him as the Hyperborean Apollo?”. 2. Pythagoras predicted that a corpse would be found on a cargo-laden ship in the harbor of Metapontum®®® 3. In Caulonia he successfully prophesied that a white bear would apgreeted him?" 4. At Tyrrhenia he bit a poisonous snake and killed u 5. Upon crossing a river (Cosa, Nessus, or Caucasus) a superhuman voice 7. At Olympia he revealed that he had a golden thigh?"?. pontum’ 6. On the same day and hour he was seen teaching in Croton and Meta- 8. He reminded Myllias of Croton that he had once been Midas?“ nis?°?, On the matter of prior incarnations, Heraclides Ponticus yields more information: Pythagoras said he was once Aethalides, the son of Hermes, Vit. Pyth. 25 = lamb. Vit. Pyth. 62). 216 Apollonius Para., Nicomachus, Ael., and Iamb. 215 Ibid. Ael. omits Croton. Nicomachus’ version of this event appears in a different context (Porph. "214 Ael. and Iamb. Cf. Nicomachus (Porph.. Vit. Pyth. 26 = lamb. Vit. Pyth. 63). 213 Apollonius Para., Nicomachus (the thigh shown to Abaris and Olympia is not mentioned), Ael., Diog. Laert. (Olympia omitted), and Iamb. Vit. Ap. 4. 10 the two places were Thurii and Metapontum. 212 Apollonius Para., Nicomachus (Metapontum and Tauromenium), and Ael. According to Philostr. 210 Apollonius Para. and Iamb. (Pythagoras only caught a poisonous snake). 211 Apollonius Para., Nicomachus, Ael., and Diog. Laert. Iamb. Cf. Nicomachus (Porph. Vit. Pyth. 23 = lamb. Vit. Pyth. 60). 209 Apollonius Para. (inferred from the mention of Caulonia followed by a gap in the text) and 207 Ael., Diog. Laert., and lamb. 208 Apollonius Para., Nicomachus (only present in Porph., who omits reference to Metapontum), and lamb. Of the ten items that are attested by at least two of the extant versions, only two are absent from Apollonius, the only pre-Christian version. That Pythagoras reminded Myllias that the latter had been Midas is mentioned by Aelian, who cites Aristotle’s name, and Iamblichus. The first item, Pythagoras’ identity as the Hyperborean Apollo, is supported by Aelian, Diogenes, and Iamblichus. The apparent literary independence of these three versions makes it probable that this item belonged to the original Aristotle passage. Moreover, since the three versions agree in placing it at the head of the list, and since this would be the logical position for it inasmuch as it does not recite a paradoxical event but reveals Pythagoras’ true identity, it is reasonable to conclude that this was its original position. left Metapontum without being seen by anyone. Apollonius, who claims to be quoting Aristotle, adds that Pythagoras predicted the subsequent divisions among the Pythagoreans and that he 10. Many other miraculous things are related concerning Pythagoras?'®. and that from the latter he received the ability to remember all of his experiences throughout his incarnations. After death his soul entered Euphorbus who, in turn, was killed by Menelaus in the Trojan war. Next, Pythagoras’ soul animated Hermotimus, who authenticated his prior existence as Euphorbus by identifying the shield of Menelaus in Apollo’s temple at Branchidae. When Hermotimus died, his soul entered Pyrrhus, a fisherman of Delos, whose soul finally embodied itself in Pythagoras’. A variation of this sequence is provided by Dicaearchus and Clearchus*°* The fourth-century witnesses, however, do more than confirm preexisting tradition: they present a treasure trove of completely new items. Here the most important source is a fragment from Aristotle’s lost treatise on Pythagoras?” which comprises a list of miracles, very succinctly narfragment are Apollonius the Paradoxographer, Nicomachus, Aelian, Diorated, pertaining to Pythagoras’ life. The sources for reconstructing this genes Laertius, and lamblichus®®® Though only Apollonius and Aelian actually cite Aristotle as their source, it is clear that the same Urtyp underlies all the versions. These items are attested by at least two of the five versions: 200 M. R. Wright, Empedocles: The Extant Fragments (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1981), p. 256 (Frag. 99) = DK 31B129. 201 For a list of adherents of this interpretation plus a dissenting opinion see Wright, Empedocles, pp. 257f. 202 Iamb. Vit. Pyth. 7. See note 199 above. 203 Heraclid. Pont., Frag. 89 (Wehrli). 204 Dicaearchus, Frag. 36 (Wehrli); Clearchus, Frag. 10 (Wehrli). 1955), pp. 129-43. 205 W. D. Ross, ed., Aristotelis: Fragmenta Selecta (= Ross), SCBO (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 206 Apollonius Para. Mir. 6; Nicomachus (Porph. Vit. Pyth. 27f. = lamb. Vit. Pyth. 134f.); Ael. Var. Hist. 2. 26; 4.17; Diog. Laert. 8. 11;and Iamb. Vit. Pyth. 140-43.

Pre-Christian Divine Miracle Workers 41 It is not clear whether this lost Aristotelian book on Pythagoras was From the beginning of the second century B.C. until around the middle mentioning: (1) after Pythagoras returned from Hades the Italians believed that he was deiov twa, and (2) this judgment is based on his supernatural journey to and from Hades and especially on his supernatural knowledge of what had transpired among the Italians during his absence. In this case the direction of thought is clear: supernatural events and knowledge lead to an ascription of divinity. katabasis to Hades?“ Hermippus account contains two points worth incarnations found in Heraclides Ponticus. The new element is furnished by Hieronymus of Rhodes and Hermippus: Pythagoras experienced a bus??? — an abbreviated and eventually dominant version of the series of traditions and yet also provide new material. Bolus apparently incorporated the Aristotelian list of miracles, into his discussion of Pythagoras??? and Callimachus knows that Pythagoras’ soul was earlier incarnated in Euphor- Third-century witnesses, like those of the fourth, repeat pre-existing Demeter and renamed his street “Museum Street”??? The final element of the Pythagoras legend that is attested as early as the fourth century is the story, attributed to Timaeus, that the citizens of Croton, after Pythagoras’ death, converted his house into a temple of really Aristotle’s production’. For our purposes it is only necessary to note that whether genuine or forged, it must be dated as early as Apollonius (2nd cent. B.C.), and if Apollonius derived his chapter on Pythagoras from Bolus, then the terminus ad quem is pushed back into the third century?*®. Whether Aristotelian or not, this reconstructed fragment is quite significant in the way it appears to ground Pythagoras’ divinity in a series of paradoxical events, the majority of which are miracles which he performed. The traditions hitherto surveyed, with one or two exceptions, fail to explicate the relationship between miracles and superhuman rank; they stand side by side, but unconnected. In a sense, of course, this is true of the that Pythagoras’ identity as Apollo is very closely related to the miraculous events which follow. This relationship can be expressed in two ways depending on whether one proceeds from the Apolline identity or the miraculous events: one could say. that since Pythagoras was Apollo, such miraculous occurrences should be expected, or conversely, that the miracles Aristotle list. Yet as one examines the list it is difficult to avoid the feeling demonstrate Pythagoras’ divine nature. Either way there is the general master’s nature: “ . . . among rational beings there is that which is god, assumption that the miraculous is particularly characteristic of divinity. In addition to the Aristotelian fragment just examined, lamblichus quotes Aristotle as having preserved a Pythagorean dictum concerning the equation by Diodorus Siculus and Horace??? of the first century A.D., nothing new is added to the superhuman portrait of Pythagoras, and in fact very little of what has already surfaced is repeated. From the second century comes Apollonius’ Historia Mirabilium in which, through Bolus, Aristotle’s list of miracles is incorporated??®, and from the first century B.C. are references to the Pythagoras-Euphorbus evaluation would appear to conflict with Pythagoras’ Apolline identity, a that which is man, and that which is like Pythagoras’”’”'”. Although this harmonization is not impossible: “ . . . the third kind of being could be Three successful predictions omitted by the Aristotle list were, accordgods in human form’’??°. Arithmeti229 Apuleius (born c, A.D. 123) produced a Latin trans. of Nicomachus’ Introductionis Patrologiae, cae (Cassiodorus De Artibus ac Disciplinis Liberalium Litterarum 586 [J. -P.Migne, of Gerasa,” Series Latina, vol. 70, p. 1208]). J. M. Dillon, “A Date for the Death of Nicomachus 228 Suda, “’AmoAAwvios Tvavedts.” 227 Diod. Sic. 10. 6. 1; Hor. Carm. 1. 28. 10f. 226 Apollonius Para. Mir. 6. 222 Timaeus FGrHist 566F 131. 223 Apollonius Para. Mir. 6; cf. the lemma that prefaces chapter one. 224 Callim., Frag. 191, line 59 (Rudolf Pfeiffer, ed., Callimachus, vol. 1: Fragmenta [Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1949]). Burkert, Lore and Science, p. 140, follows Rohde in concluding that the abbreviated version is actually the original one. On the basis of Hom. Il. 16. 849f., K. Kerényi, Pythagoras and Orpheus (Zurich: Rhein-Verlag, 19503), p. 19, suggested that Euphorbus was a cipher for Apollo. 225 Hieronymus of Rhodes, Frag. 42 (Wehrli), and Hermippus, Frag. 20 (Wehrli). (died in Nerva’s reign??*) and Nicomachus of Gerasa (c. 50-150)””°. Source In contrast to this paucity, the hundred years between 50 and 150 A.D. compares favorably with the fourth century B.C. in the amount of old and new information that its authorities produce. The two most important authors for this period are two Neopythagoreans,, Apollonius of Tyana ing to Porphyry’”', recorded by the fourth-century author Andron of Ephesus: (1) in Metapontum Pythagoras took a drink from a well and predicted an earthquake on the third day, (2) in Megara Hyblaea he prophesied that a ship sailing with a favorable wind would sink and it occurred immediately, and (3) he predicted the conquest of Sybaris. 217 Burkert, Lore and Science, p. 29, n. 5, lists advocates of both views. 218 Ibid., p.29,n. 5 and p.141,n. 115. 219 Arist. De Pythagoreis, Frag. 2 (Ross) = Iamb. Vit. Pyth. 31 (translated by Burkert, Lore and Science, p. 144). 220 Burkert, Lore and Science, p. 144. 221 Porph. (in Euseb. Praep. Evang. 10. 3. 6). The first two of these miracles are ascribed to Pythagoras by Iamb. Vit. Pyth. 136. However, Theopompus (FGrHist 115F70), according to Porph., falsely attributed these three wonders to Pherecydes. As Pherecydes’ miracles they are recited in Apollonius Para. Mir. 5 and Diog. Laert. 1. 116.

impregnated by Apollo”°'. At this point he quotes an anonymous Samian analysis of the biographies of Pythagoras by Porphyry and lamblichus has revealed portions of these earlier (and no longer extant) Neopythagorean treatments of Pythagoras’ °° Apollonius, who probably wrote earlier than Nicomachus, cites Epimenides, Eudoxus, and Xenocrates for the belief that Pythagoras’ mother was is the Samians, bore to Apollo”?®® But if what follows in Iamblichus?’? poet: “Pythagoras, the friend of Zeus, whom Pythais, most beautiful of also attributed to Apollonius, then he categorically denies this notion”. He does, however, affirm that “the soul of Pythagoras was sent to mankind from the empire of Apollo, either being an attendant on the God, or co-arranged with him in some other more familiar way: for this may be inferred both from his birth and the all-various wisdom of his soul””°°. In this statement Pythagoras’ divinity is authenticated on the basis of his wisdom (probably not to be sharply contrasted with the miraculous, the mystical, the irrational) and on the basis of the wondrous event prior to his birth: at Delphi Apollo informed Pythagoras’ father, Mnesarchus, that he would have a son who would be of the greatest advantage to the human race in every thing pertaining to the life of man’’’** Mnesarchus, who came to Delphi to inquire only concerning his impending voyage to Syria, knew that Apollo would not have given him unrequested information concerning Tov we àAn0 wc Eveadaı”. a future child ei un é£aiperov nporépnua EneAXe rept abrôv Kai Heoswpn- Classical Review, N. S., 19 (1969): 274f., argues that Nicomachus may have died in A.D. 196 since (1) Proclus, who was born A.D. 412, believed himself to be a reincarnation of Nicomachus, and since (2) Pythagoreans believed that Pythagoras’ incarnations occurred at intervals of 216 nisches Museum 26 (1871): 554—76, and 27 (1872):23—61 (later published in his Kleine Schrifyears. 230 Cf. Erwin Rohde, “Die Quellen des Iamblichus in seiner Biographie des Pythagoras,’ Rheiten | Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1901], 2:102-72); Isidore Levy, Recherches sur les sources de la legende de Pythagore (Paris: Editions Ernest Leroux, 1926), and Burkert, Lore and Science, pp. 97-109. J. A. Philip, “The Biographical Tradition — Pythagoras,” Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association 90 (1959):185—94, explains most of the material common to Porphyry and lamblichus as the result of the latter having used the former. But cf. Burkert’s critique (Lore and Seience, p. 98,n. 5). 231 lamb. Vit. Pyth. 7. That this tradition is embedded in material derived from Apollonius is proved by Porph. Vit. Pyth. 2. As noted earlier, however, Porphyry does not specifically mention Xenocrates, Eudoxus, and Epimenides, but only says that “some declare Pythagoras was by procreation the child of Apollo.” 232 Porph. Vit. Pyth. 2;lamb. Vit. Pyth. 5. child if the child had not been destined to be extraordinary. Therefore, Taylor’s translation is 233 Absent from Porph. 234 Iamb. Vit. Pyth. 7. 235 Ibid., 8. 236 Ibid., 5. 237 Ibid., 6. The point is that Apollo would not have given unrequested information about a future _Pre-Christian Divine Miracle Workers 43 The birth story does not exhaust Apollonius’ knowledge of Pythagoras’ superhuman power and status. If Apollonius composed the material comhimself before the tyrant Phalaris, knew that he was not destined to be prising Iamblichus 215—227** then he relates how Pythagoras, defending and after he died ékeivor tov dvb pa?! executed by him’. On the contrary, Pythagoras liberated Sicily by effecting, in a somewhat supernatural way, Phalaris’ death’*®. Elsewhere Apollonius twice refers to Pythagoras’ divine dignity: (1) the young Pythagoras was regarded as a god by the multitudes in Samos, and (2) the Pythagoreans refused to call Pythagoras by name, but while living they called him 8eior, reference to Pythagoras’ divinity to be found in the so-called Letters of Outside of the fragments of Apollonius’ book on Pythagoras to be gleaned from Porphyry and Iamblichus, there is one further Apollonian Apollonius’*?. In the fiftieth epistle, whose authenticity like that of all the letters is highly questionable, Apollonius places Pythagoras &» yeveı daıOv. The sections in Porphyry and Iamblichus which were derived from Nicoof Pythagorean miracles absent from earlier sources’**. Moreover, if Pormachus?*? greatly surpass the Apollonian fragments in their presentation phyry 23-31 was lifted directly from Nicomachus with little alteration?*°, then he recited these materials back-to-back, thus creating (or maintaining) an impressive list. The first four of these miracles, in which animals play a key role, are more developed than the miracles in the Aristotle list and consequently bear more resemblance to the Markan miracle stories in length and form, if not content. The less verbose version appears in Porphyry™**: inadequate: “But, when Mnesarchus considered with himself, that the God, without being interrogated concerning his son, had informed him by an oracle, that he would possess an illus- 56 (Leiden: E‚ J. Brill, 1979). Supplements, trious prerogative, and a gift truly divine, he immediately . . . v2 Recherches, pp. 109f., follows Rohde with the Levy,—66; 238 Cf. Rohde, Kleine Schriften, 2:164 : exception of chapter 222. 239 Iamb. Vit. Pyth. 217. 240 Ibid., 220-22. 241 Ibid., 11, 255. lamb. names Apollonius as his source in chapter 254 and it is generally agreed that the Apollonian material extends through chapter 264. 242 Text and commentary by Robert J. Penella, The Letters of Apollonius of Tyana, Mnemosyne thinks he detects a tendency to tone down or ignore the paradoxical “‘so that what remains is, 243 Cf. Burkert’s list (Lore and Science, p. 98, n. 6) of Nicomachean fragments in Porph. and Tamb. 244 Despite the number of miracles which Nicomachus records, Burkert (Lore and Science, p. 146) essentially, clairvoyance and the doctrine of the kinship of all living beings, and the exhortation to huepórns.” 245 Burkert, Lore and Science, p. 99. 246 Porph. Vit. Pyth. 23-25; lamb. Vit. Pyth. 60-62, 36.

Pre-Christian Divine Miracle Workers that is said to have wounded many of those who lived in its country, he stroked it for a long time and fed it with barley cake and acorns, and having sworn it never again to touch living creatures, let it go. Thereupon it went off into the mountains and thickets, and was never again seen attacking any animal at all. Again, when he saw an ox in Tarentum eating green beans in a pasture that from beans. The oxherd answered him with ridicule and said that, himself, he didn’t speak ox contained many sorts of food, he went up to the oxherd and advised him to tell the ox to abstain language. So Pythagoras went near and whispered in the ear of the ox. It not only left the bean- 251 Porph. Vit. Pyth. 28f.; lamb. Vit. Pyth, 135f. 252 Porph. Vit. Pyth. 30f.; lamb. Vit. Pyth. 64-67. 253 Porph. Vit. Pyth. 30. 254 lamb. Vit. Pyth. 65f. 255 Porph. Vit. Pyth. 20; lamb. Vit. Pyth. 30. 256 Plut. Num. 8. 257 Antonius Diogenes (in Porph. Vit. Pyth. 32f. and Iamb. Vit. Pyth. 110f.). known to Plutarch?°®. Diogenes, like Nicomachus, carried an account of Pythagoras’ use of music and charms to cure illnesses?*’, Favorinus knew a perhaps more) of the Aristotle list — that Pythagoras brought down and tamed an eagle and that he showed his golden thigh in Olympia — are period as Nicomachus, offer nothing new. Two of the elements (and Plutarch, Antonius Diogenes, and Favorinus, writing in the same general might function like the first item of the Aristotle fragment. near the beginning of his list of miracles (assuming Porphyry has left Nicomachus intact), may reflect his or others’ opinion that the miracles confirm this judgment. If so, this equating of Pythagoras with the gods and counted Pythagoras among the gods”***. This assertion, standing so In addition to the ascriptions of divinity to Pythagoras within his miracle cycle, Nicomachus included a similar testimony in a preceding paragraph: the Italian disciples of Pythagoras “both communized their possessions ical power (öatuovlov) that inspired him 254. the only one on the earth adapted to this, by the conformation of his body, through the daemonfountain itself and root. He therefore thought himself worthy to be taught, and to learn something about the celestial orbs, and to be assimilated to them by desire and imitation, as being habitants of the earth, the mundane sounds were understood and heard, and this from a natural . . employing a certain ineffable divinity (#eiörnri) . . . extended his ears, and fixed his intellect in the sublime symphonies of the world .... For he conceived that by him alone, of all the in- Pythagoras, however, because of the inferiority of our nature (onıkpörnra tis búoewe)°. Moreover, it is clear that Nicomachus grounded Pythagoras’ ability to hear the cosmic music in his superhuman nature. We do not hear this harmony 45 Moreover, if the ancient and reputable authors who wrote accounts of his life are to be physical and organic illnesses by means of music and incantations’°? no one else have greater and more extraordinary things been believed””°'. He averted earthquakes and “drove off plagues and checked violent winds and hailstorms and calmed the waters of rivers and seas, so that his companions could easily cross them.” Some believed that Pythagoras was able to teach in Metapontum and Tauromenium on the same day for the same reason that Abaris was able to cross rivers and seas and other forbidding places: by somehow walking on air (perhaps through the aid of Apollo’s arrow). The second motif unfolds itself as Nicomachus reveals how Pythagoras was able to hear the cosmic music and thereby was able to heal both credited, his admonitions extended even to irrational animals. For catching the Daunian bear, sages of a sort from the gods to those among men who are truly dear to them, it is reported field at that moment but never again touched beans. It lived to an extreme old age in Tarentum, staying near the temple of Hera, and was called the sacred ox and ate such food as the passers-by offered it. Yet again, at Olympia, when he chanced to speak to his acquaintances concerning auguries from flights of birds and omens and signs from the sky, saying that these too are mesthat he drew to earth an eagle that was flying over, stroked it, and again, let it go. Once he came upon fishermen drawing in their nets from the deep with a great catch, and he foretold to them how many fish they were pulling, specifying the number. When the men undertook to do whatever he might order, should this number turn out to be correct, he commanded them to let the fish go again, alive, after they had counted them accurately. What was yet more marvelous, although the fish stayed out of the water for all the long time it took to count them, none of them died while he was present. The story of Pythagoras summoning and stroking the eagle, of course, is a variant to the similar miracle in the Aristotle list. The other three, howgoras “called back to the memories of many whom he met the former lives ever, are new?*”. Following these four miracles Nicomachus presents a series of miracles which are attested much earlier. Fourth-century sources know that Pythalist, which includes four of the ten items attested in at least two versions”*”. their souls had lived” and “‘by indisputable signs... proved himself to have been Euphorbus’?*® Next, Nicomachus inserts his version of the Aristotle To these four items, however, he adds one which partially rests on the old tradition that in Olympia Pythagoras revealed his golden thigh: Pythagoras showed his golden thigh to Abaris, priest of the Hyperborean Apollo, in order to confirm the priest’s supposition that Pythagoras himself was the Hyperborean Apollo. This is one of two, possibly three, places where Nicomachus closely correlates supernatural phenomena with divine Nicomachus concludes his recitation of Pythagoras’ miraculous powers °°. nature? goras’ powers over the elements of nature, which confirm that ‘‘about with two motifs that hitherto have not surfaced. First, he describes Pytha- 247 There are, however, earlier, non-miraculous versions of the fish story: Plut. Quaest. conv. 8. 8. 3 (729D); idem De Capienda ex Inimicis Utilitate 9 (91C); and Apul. Apol. 31. have signified more than a mere marvelous fact (cf. Burkert, Lore and Science, pp. 159f.). 248 Porph. Vit. Pyth. 26;lamb. Vit. Pyth. 63, 134. 249 Porph. Vit. Pyth. 27f.; lamb. Vit. Pyth. 134f. 250 Of course, for the Pythagoreans who believed their master was Apollo, his golden thigh may

variant of the tradition, attested by Timaeus, that Pythagoras’ house was converted into a shrine for Demeter’**. Echoes of earlier traditions are also scattered about in the writings of the second-century skeptic Lucian. That Pythagoras had a golden thigh, that he was previously Euphorbus, and that he descended to and returned from Hades are all known to him’*®. Lucian also knows that Pythagoras’ divinity was authenticated by the miraculous. For example, in his Vitarum Auctio Lucian puts the following words into the mouth of one who contemplates buying a Pythagorean philosopher: “Come, strip, for I want to see you unclothed. Heracles! His thigh is of gold! He seems to be a god »260 Tn the Dialogi Mortuorum (eds) and not a mortal (Bporôs) . . Menippus greets Pythagoras thus: “Good day to you, Euphorbus or Apollo, Pythagoras, Menippus asks: “Don’t you still have your thigh of gold’’?*" or whatever name you prefer.” Then, after being wished a bad day by that they thought me a god” (@edv)7°* Finally, in Gallus Lucian makes Pythagoras say: “I even went to Egypt to study with the prophets, penetrated into their sarictuaries and learned the books of Horus and Isis by heart, and then I sailed away to Italy and worked upon the Greeks in that quarter of the world to such an extent to expiate in that way would make a long story’”®’. This conception of There is a passage in Gallus where the relationship between Pythagoras and Apollo is not formulated in terms of identity. Here the cock, animated by Pythagoras’ soul, says: “How my soul originally left Apollo, flew down to earth and entered a human body and what sin it was condemned Pythagoras’ relationship to Apollo apart from the reference to sin and expiation is similar to that (possibly) offered by Apollonius of Tyana?‘*, Several authors from between the final years of the second century through the initial years of the fourth transmit various elements of the Pythagoras legend, but with the exception of lamblichus, little new material emerges. In his Vita Apollonii Philostratus attributes to Pythagoras the claim that he had sure knowledge concerning the divinity (rod deiov) since “Apollo had come to him acknowledging that he was the god in person; and that Athene and the Muses and other gods.... had also con- 258 Favorinus, Frag. 73 (Adelmo Barigazzi, ed., Favorino di Arelate Opere [Firenze: Felice le Monnier, 1966]). The authority for this fragment is Diog. Laert. 8. 15, but also see lamb. Vit. Pyth. 170, where the same tradition is quoted without reference to Favorinus. Pre-Christian Divine Miracle Workers 47 ments listed above, is actually derived from two separate passages”°®. The sorted with him though without making such acknowledgment”’?°°. No wonder, then, that Pythagoras’ disciples “honoured him as an emissary from Zeus (ds ek As kovra)”*% As regards miracles, Philostratus knows that Pythagoras was in two places at the same time?®”. We have already noted that one of the five versions of the Aristotle list was transmitted by Aelian. His version, which includes six of the ten elefirst list of three miracles is introduced with the statement that the Crotonians regarded Pythagoras as the Hyperborean Apollo. The second list of five miracles (three of which overlap the first list) is preceded by a similar this text as one of the clearest examples of the notion that supernatural affirmation: 'Eöidaoke Iv@aydpos Tobe avOpwrovs OTL KPELTTOVWY yeyévnTat onepnarwv N Kara THY biow THY Ovnrnv. The way in which the following miracles are linked to this statement by the word yap distinguishes As one would expect, a good deal of information about Pythagoras deeds prove supernatural origin and nature. can be found in Diogenes Laertius; in fact several older texts are known through his citations: Xenophanes on Pythagoras’ recognition of a human soul in a dog, Heraclides Ponticus on the previous incarnations of Pythagoras’ soul, Hieronymus and Hermippus on his katabasis, and Favorinus of course, on the conversion of his house into a shrine for Demeter?®? .He also, records a brief version of the Aristotle list?”°. However, he is not devoid of new information. Besides adducing Hieronymus and Hermippus as witnesses to a katabasis tradition, Diogenes quotes a work in which Pythagoras is supposed to have said that “after two hundred and seven years in Hades he . . . returned to the land of the living”””'. Diogenes also discloses that Pythagoras “used to practise divination by sounds or voices and by auguries, never by burnt-offerings, beyond frankincense’’?"?. To the declarations of Pythagoras’ divinity found in Diogenes’ quotations from earlier authors, he adds nothing save his testimony that Pytha- ‘prophets to declare the voice of God’”’?”*. goras was admired to such an extent that “his disciples used to be called Every element pertaining to Pythagoras’ miracles and divine status which appears in the biography by Porphyry has already been encountered. 265 Philostr. Vit. Ap. 1.1. 266 Ibid. 267 Ibid., 4. 10 (Thurii and Metapontum). 268 Ael. Var. Hist. 2. 26; 4. 17. 270 Ibid., 8. 11. 269 Diog. Laert. 8. 36; 8. 4 (cf. 8. 45); 8. 21; 8. 41; 8.15. 259 Lucian Dial. Mort. 20. 3;idem Vit. Auct. 6;idem Gall. 4, 15-18. 260 Lucian Vit. Auet. 6. 272 Ibid., 8. 20. 273 Ibid., 8. 14. 271 Ibid., 8. 14. 261 Lucian, Dial. Mort. 20.3. 262 Lucian Gall. 18. 263 Ibid., 16. 264 Cf. p. 42.

He knows a five-series list of Pythagoras’ incarnations very much like that given by Heraclides Ponticus?”* To Timaeus he attributes the tradition that Pythagoras’ house became a temple for Demeter?”®. That Pythagoras was believed by some (e.g., a Samian poet) to have been the son of Apollo is derived from Apollonius of Tyana?”® His largest debt, however, is to Nicomachus, from whom he borrowed all the Nicomachean traditions delineated above. Although Nicomachus knew that Pythagoras was able to heal through music and incantations, Porphyry also referred to a similar tradition known to Antonius Diogenes’ ”’. Finally, though nothing is said about it in the Vita Pythagorae, Porphyry knew, according to Eusebius, the miracles of prophecy that were credited to Pythagoras-by Andron of Ephesus’ ”®. Jamblichus, the other Neoplatonic biographer of Pythagoras, knew the traditions attested by Aristotle, Apollonius of Tyana, Nicomachus, Antonius Diogenes, and Favorinus. However, in the case of the Nicomachean version of the Aristotle list, lamblichus has produced an interesting modification (assuming that Porphyry’s version is more original). From a bare list of miracles lamblichus has created an explicit aretalogy: He places Pythagoras’ miracles under the rubric ra rap apetwv Epya abrob?”; they are all indications of his evoeßeua” —. If apern, in analogy with the aretalogies of Isis and Sarapis’**, is to be understood as the supernatural power wielded by a god, then we may conclude that Iamblichus has here forged a direct link between miracles and divinity. Besides the Nicomachean version of the Aristotle list, lamblichus incorporates a version of his own, in which four new items appear: (1) Pythagoras entertained a Hyperborean, Abaris, as his guest and received from him the golden arrow on which he flew, (2) in Sybaris he caught and dismissed a poisonous snake, (3) he predicted the death of the white bear of Caulonia “to one who was about to tell him that it was dead,” and (4) “the person who bought his house, and who dug up that which had been the Nicomachean version, Iamblichus closely correlates Pythagoras’ miraburied in it, did not dare to tell anyone what he saw’”?®?. As in the case of 274 Porph. Vit. Pyth. 45. 275 Ibid., 4. 276 Ibid., 2. 277 Ibid., 32f. 278 Porph. (in Euseb. Praep. Evang. 10. 3. 6). 279 lamb. Vit. Pyth. 134. 280 Ibid, 137. 281 See the collection of aretalogies in V. Longo, ed., Aretalogie nel mondo greco, vol. 1, Epigrafi e papiri (Genova: Istituto di filologia classica e medioevale, 1969). 282 Iamb. Vit. Pyth, 140-43. Pre-Christian Divine Miracle Workers 49 cles and divinity: immediately following this list lamblichus says that the Pythagoreans relate these things + . in order to render their opinions worthy of belief. And as these are acknowledged to be true, and it is impossible they should have happened to one man, they consequently think it is clear, that what is related ‘of Pythagoras, should be received as pertaining to a being superior to man, and not to a mere man. This also is the meaning of their enigmatical assertion, that man, bird, and another third thing, are bipeds. For the third thing is Pythagoras?83 A similar correlation is apparent in Iamblichus’ account of Pythagoras’ voyage from Syria to Egypt.Certain Egyptian sailors agreed to take Pythagoras from Mount Carmel to Egypt, secretly planning to sell him at a large profit. him. Observing, like- But when, during the voyage, they perceived with what continence and venerable gravity he conducted himself, . .. , they were more benevolently disposed toward uninterrupted, as if-some wise, that there was something greater than what pertains to human nature in the modesty of the youth, they called to mind how unexpectedly he had appeared to them on their landing, when from the summit of mount Carmelus, which they knew was more sacred than other mountains, and inaccessible to the vulgar, he leisurely descended without looking back, or suffering any delay from precipices or opposing stones; and that when he came to the boat, he said nothing more than, “Are you bound to Egypt?” And farther, that on their answering in the affirmative, he ascended the ship and sate [sic] silent in the whole time of the voyage .... But Pythagoras remained in one and the same unmoved state for two nights and three days, neither partaking of food, nor drink, nor sleep... . To which we may add, that when the sailors considered how, contrary to their expectations, their voyage had been continued and deity had been present (&c dv twos mapovoia 6eoë); putting all these things together, they concluded that a divine daemon (5aluova deiov) had in reality passed over with them from Syria into Egypt .... Here the sailors reverently assisted him in descending from the ship; and after they had placed him on the purest sand, they raised a certain temporary altar before him, and heaping on it from their present abundance the fruit of trees, and presenting him as it were with the first fruits of their freight, they departed from thence . , „28% through the spondaic song of a piper, Here virtue, miracle, and numinous behavior are intertwined and made the basis for the conclusion that Pythagoras is really a daemon. In connection with Pythagoras’ use of music to heal somatic and psychic illnesses, Tambichus furnishes a concrete example: Among the deeds of Pythagoras... ‚it is said, that once which however Pythagoras most he extinguished the rage of a Tauromenian lad, who had been feasting by night, and intended to burn the vestibule of his mistress, in consequence of seeing her coming from the house of his rival. For the lad was inflamed and excited by a Phrygian song; rapidly suppressed. But Pythagoras, as he was astronomizing, happened to meet with the Phrygian piper at an unseasonable time of night, and persuaded him to change his Phrygian for a spondaic song; through which the fury of the lad being immediately repressed, he returned home in an orderly manner, though a little before this, he could not be in the least restrained, nor would in short, bear any admonition; and even stupidly insulted Pythagoras when he met him 283 283 Ibid., 143f. 284 Ibid., 14-17. 285 Ibid., 112.

This tale, which illustrates the divine wisdom and persuasive powers of Iamblichus records no more new miracle stories, but he does reveal that Pythagoras, resembles several of the evangelical miracle stories in general form and certain specific motifs (e.g., immediacy of the cure). | The divine status of Pythagoras is expressed in a multitude of (sometimes Pythagoras practiced divination by using numbers***. conflicting) ways. This is true even if one ignores the expressions of divinity which appear in the identifiable sources of lamblichus — Aristotle, Apollonius of Tyana, Nicomachus, and Antonius Diogenes. Pythagoras’ identity with Apollo is known in passages not derived from Aristotle or Nicomachus: “ ... by certain persons he was thought to be Apollo,” and the precepts of Pythagoras were “like certain oracles delivered by the Pythian but rather ‘admired him as if he had been a God” (€0avyagev ws av Apollo”?%7. Elsewhere, Abaris knew that Pythagoras was not a magician, 5, Sometimes we encounter Pythagoras the daiuwv. Above it was geov) observed that the sailors who carried Pythagoras to Egypt concluded that he was a Saiuova Oeiov; earlier lamblichus recorded how the young Pythagoras “dwelt at Samos like a beneficent daemon” (Saipwy rıs ayados) . On the other hand, Iamblichus includes the statement that the young by many, that he was a son of God” (8eoû maiéa)””®, | Pythagoras’ behavior was so commendable that “it was reasonably asserted Besides classifications like 9eóc (Apollo), Saiuwv, and mais deoü, lamblichus employs a variety of other means to depict Pythagoras as a man who, as a higher type of being, stands above the mass of humanity. Thus we find the Pythagorean tenet: “ .. . man, bird, and another third thing, are In bipeds”””'!. As seen above, Iamblichus identifies this “third thing” as Pythagoras, who is ‘‘a being superior to man, and not... a mere man.” contrast to Porphyry, and indeed all earlier discussions of Pythagoras, ,as évdeoc , the latter appears relatively often as the “divine” or “most divine” Pythaas deonpemeoraros””, and as possessing a ducırnv Heoeıdeiav 298, goras”- Similarly, he is described as a Sauuóvios avip Pre-Christian Divine Miracle Workers SL The unity of opinion that Pythagoras was ‘superior to man” and the disagreement as to the precise nature of that superiority are clearly expressed in a passage (possibly Nicomachean??”) depicting how Pythagoras’ original adherents in Croton reacted to his person: Such also was their reverence for Pythagoras, that they numbered him with the Gods (dewv), as a certain beneficent and most philanthropic daemon (Sa{uova). And some indeed celebrated but others as one of the daemons that inhabit the moon; and others as one of the Olympian him as the Pythian, but others as the Hyperborean Apollo. Some again considered him as Paeon, the salutary light of felicity and philosophy ?°® Gods, who, in order to benefit and correct the mortal life, appeared to the men of those times in human form (év dàvôpwnlvn noppf Pavrvar rois rdre), in order that he might extend to them 12. Empedocles According to Alcidamus and Timaeus??? Pythagoras was the teacher of that great pre-Socratic philosopher Empedocles. The case of Empedocles is unusual in that he himself has provided us with testimony regarding his miraculous works and his divine status. In the last fragment of his Physics he promises: compensating breezes. After black rain you will bring dry weather ,... , and too after summer You will learn remedies for ills and help against old age, since for you alone shall I accomplish all these things. You will check the force of tireless winds ... ; and again . . . you will restore dryness you will bring tree-nourishing showers .. . , and you will lead from Hades the life-force of a dead man? More remarkable is the first fragment of his Katharmoi, in which he appears to claim that he has become a god: crowned with ribbons and fresh garlands. Whenever I enter prospering towns I am revered by I tell you I travel up and down as an immortal god, mortal no longer, honored by all as it seems, some seeking prophecies, others, long pierced by harsh pains, ask to hear the word of healing both men and women. They follow me in countless numbers, to ask where their advantage lies, for all kinds of illnesses? 01 Even if Empedocles is claiming neither miraculous powers?°? nor deity*®* at least not in the usual sense, these fragments would easily come to 299 Alcidamas (in Diog. Laert. 8. 56); Timaeus FGrHist 566F 14 = Diog. Laert. 8. 54. This, however, 297 Porph. Vit. Pyth. 20 only says that the Pythagoreans “counted Pythagoras among the gods.” 298 Iamb. Vit. Pyth. 30. Cf. the notes, translation, and paraphrase of Günther Zuntz, Persephone: Three Essays on is discounted by Wright, Empedocles, p. 5, who in pp. 3-6 gives the ancient testimony on Empedocles’ chronology and concludes that a life span of about 494—434 B.C. is probable. 300 Emped., Frag. 101 (Wright [whose trans. is used]) = Diog. Laert. 8. 59. 301 Ibid., Frag. 102 (Wright) = DK 31B112 = Diog, Laert. 8. 62 (cf. Clem. Al. Strom. 6. 3. 30). Religion and Thought in Magna Graecia (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1971), pp. 189-93, 251— 53: 302 Wright, Empedocles, p. 262: “The main point is that E. expects that an understanding of the nature of earth, fire, and water alone and in combinations will bring with it the ability to mani- 286 Ibid., 93, 147. 287 Ibid., 133 (cf. 177), 213 (cf. 34). 288 Ibid., 216. 289 Ibid., 10. 290 Ibid. 291 Ibid., 144. Cf, the similar dictum in chap. 31. 292: Ibid; 1, 12,:53, 162. 293 Ibid., 76. respiration could lead to the restoration of the breathing mechanism.” 303 Cf. Wright, Empedocles, pp. 60f. N. van der Ben, The Proem of Empedocles’ Peri Physios (Ampulate them. This may well have been thought to extend to medicine, where a knowledge of 294 Ibid., 216. 295 Ibid., 9. 296 Ibid., 10.

Pre-Christian Divine Miracle Workers by the desire to confirm reports that he had become a god?! According to Diodorus, Empedocles once eradicated a pestilence in Selinus by diverting, at his own expense, the courses of two rivers so that they merged with the putrid river near Selinus. After The Miracle-Working @eio. "Avöpes of Hellenism be so interpreted. According to Satyrus, Gorgias of Leontini maintained that Empedocles had claimed the ability to yonrevew, and that he himself had witnessed various feats*°* Timaeus recorded a miracle which illustrates the powers of Empedocles as expressed in the fragment from Physics: 52 When the etesian winds once began to blow violently and to damage the crops, he ordered (Eur. Heracl. he was now a god’”?!?, 13. Zalmoxis Zalmoxis®% who came to be regarded as a god among the Getae, 7 Vit. Pyth. 173. ; Apul. Apol. 26. 317 Plat. Charm. 158B (cf. 156D) 316 Diog. Laert. 8. 2, 315 Strab. 7. 3. 5 (297f,). Deo. Concil. 9; Diog. Laert. 8. 2; lamb. ius know certain Fr trans. W. R Trask (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1972). j is 314 Hat. 4. 94f.; Hellanicus FGrHi st 4F73 = Suda, “Zdwor tic.” Cf. Lucian Jupp. Trag. 42; idem 311 Hippo botus (in Diog. Laert. 8. 69); Diodo rus of Ephesus (in Diog. Laert. 8. 70). Cf. Hor. Ars P. 464-66; Ovid Ibis 597f.; Lucian Dial. Mort. 20 (6-LCL). 4; idem Fug. 1. 312 Heraclid. Pont., Frag. 83 (Wehrl i) = Diog. Laert. 8. 67f. 313 On Zalmoxis in general see Mircea Eliade, Zalmoxis: The Vanishing God, charms of Zalmoxis*!” the Getae worshiped him as Kronos?!®, Plato and Apule Predictions from the celestial signs’*!5, and Diogenes Laertius adds that oras) to “make moxis partially rested on his ability (learned from Pythag as a god”, To this basic outline Strabo adds that the deification of Zaltherein for three years, he reappe ared to the peopl e in the fourth year, whereupon the populace believed his doctrine and came to reverence him this doctrine, he built an underground vault and having concealed himself also reputed to have had a close relationship with Pythag oras. Herodotus knows the tradit ion that Zalmo xis was one of Pythag oras’ slaves, but having become free and wealt hy he migrat ed to Thrace , where he taught its inhabitants that they would all live forever in a blesse d state. To prove was calling Empedocles,” whereupon “he got up and behel d a light in the heavens and a glitter of lamps, but nothing else.” Havin g searc hed for him with no success, Pausanias instructed the people “to sacrif ice to him since missing. In the course of attem pting to disco ver his where abouts, “someone said that in the middle of the night he heard an exceedingly loud voice There is, however, an altern ate versi on of Emped ocles ’ apotheosis: Heraclides Ponticus tells how, on the morni ng after Emped ocles and his friends had been sacrificing and feasting, Empedocles was discovered prayed to him as to a god (kaBarepel deg). It was to confirm this belief of theirs that he leapt into the fire. ... the pestilence had been stayed and the Selinuntines were feasting on the river bank, Empedocles appeared (éripavñvai); and the company rose up and worshipped (mpookvveiv) and “wind-stayer”>05 asses to be flayed and bags to be made of their skin. These he stretched out here and there on the hills and headlands to catch the wind and, because this checked the wind, he was called the Heraclides Ponticus illustrated Empedocles’ claim to healing power with a story about a woman in a trance whose body ‘‘he kept . . . without pulsa“Empedocles became famous because he had sent away the dead woman tion though she never breathed’”®°® Because of this, said Heraclides, alive’ °°’, Hermippus identified this woman as “Panthea, a woman of Agrigentum, who had been given up by the physicians”*°® Finally, Empedocles, like Pythagoras, was reputed to have subdued violent passions by music: verse of Homer, When a certain youth also rushed with a drawn sword on Anchitus, the host of Empedocles, because, being a judge, he had publicly condemned his father to death, and would have slain him as a homocide, Empedocles changed the intention of the youth, by singing to his lyre that Nepenthe, without gall, o’er every ill Oblivion spreads; — and thus snatched his host Anchitus from death, and the youth from the crime of homocide. It is also related that the youth from that time became the most celebrated of the disciples of Pythagoras? 09 That Empedocles thought that he had become a god is the basis for the tradition that he ended his life by jumping into the fiery crater of Mt. claiming to Aetna®'®, Hippobotus and Diodorus of Ephesus say that he was motivated sterdam: B. R. Griiner, 1975), pp. 22-25, argues that Empedocles was not actually be a god. Zuntz, Persephone, pp. 251-74, maintained that Empedocles’ claim is to be understood against the belief, closely related to the Pythagorean transmigration of souls, that each earthly person is a fallen god, “a divine potency stripped, for an aeon, of his divine identity” (p. 271), whose task and hope is recovery of the original divine state through proper worship (which includes abstention from blood sacrifices). 304 Satyrus, Frag. 12 (FHG, 3) = Diog. Laert. 8. 59. 305 Timaeus FGrHist 566F30 = Diog. Laert. 8. 60. Other versions appear in Plut. Curios. 1 (515C); 310 Heracles experienced apotheosis when he burned himself on a pyre at Mt. Aetna idem Col, 32 (1126B) (in both passages the deed is rationalized); Clem. Al. Strom. 6. 3. 30; Philostr. Vit. Ap. 8. 7. 8; Porph. Vit. Pyth. 29; lamb. Vit. Pyth. 135f.; Suda, “'Euneêokhmc.” 306 Heraclid. Pont., Frag. 77 (Wehrli) = Diog. Laert. 8. 60-62. Because of this feat “Heraclides called him not merely a physician but a diviner (uévrw) as well” (Diog. Laert. 8. 61). 307 Ibid., Frag. 83 (Wehrli) = Diog. Laert. 8. 67. 308 Hermippus, Frag. 27 (Wehrli) = Diog. Laert. 8. 69. 309 Iamb. Vit. Pyth. 113. 910-16; Diod. Sic. 4. 38. 4f. [skeptical] ; Apollod. Bibl. 2. 7. 7).

Pre-Christian Divine Miracle Workers accordingly**”. Having determined that the gods were about to betray Pharaoh, he was able to divine the results of his battles and thus to plan (4th cent: B.C.), acquired the reputation of a powerful wizard??‘. While bears witness that Nectanebus, the last independent ruler of ancient Egypt Pseudo-Callisthenes***, whose date of composition is uncertain’‘, 15. Nectanebus to others’. teides confessed, ‘‘. . . my progress was far the greatest and most marked whenever I sat beside you and held and touched you’”*”. A further development in Theages is found in its conception of the Öatuóvrov as an almost personal divine being. If the öaıuovıov renders a negative verdict on Socrates’ plan to teach Theages, the latter may “try to conciliate the divine sign itself . . . with prayers and sacrifices and anything else that the seers may indicate”**® This tendency is pushed to the extreme in Apuleius wherein the ôatuóvtov is no longer a voice, but a daemon who visibly manifests himself to Socrates but remains invisible from Socrates’°°. After realizing the reason for his loss of wisdom, Arisvoice does not forbid, he may find that, like a certain Aristeides, his wisdom or öVvauıs will gradually dissipate when he becomes physically distant his conversations with Socrates will profit him nothing*?®. And even if the 55 14. Socrates At this point it may seem highly inappropriate to introduce the name of Socrates, since his reputation as a deios°!® is overwhelmingly based on his ultimately responsible for the educational progress and attainments of Socrates’ pupils. Moreover, in some cases the power of the atuóvrov is effective only in physical proximity to Socrates. Theages, a young man wishing to study under Socrates, is told that unless the öaıuovıov approves, his 8ei6v rı kai Saruóvrov in Plato’s Apology*!? paved the way for Socrates rational powers and moral virtue; however, his famous statement about to be viewed, by some at least, as a type of seer. Even in the Apology the absence of the forbidding voice of the 8atuóvrov allows Socrates to foreknow that his death will not be an evil thing??° In course of time there developed several stories of how individuals or groups suffered misfortune when they disregarded the warnings of Socrates’ Saiudviov: (1) calamity befell Charmides because he trained for the Nemean races??!, (2) Timarchus murder””?, (3) the Athenians’ campaigns against Sicily and Ephesus/Ionia was executed because he left a wine party and subsequently committed a were disastrous*?*, (4) Charillus the flute player and others were caught in a stampede of pigs when they refused to take an alternate route to Euthyphron’s house**, (5) the branch of a tree struck Crito’s eye when he went for a walk in the country°?°, and (6) certain friends of Plato’s stepfather, Pyrilampes, were killed in retreat because they did not follow Socrates??®. Inasmuch as some of these accounts presuppose that Socrates’ Öatpóvwov sometimes warned him about the plans and intentions of his friends as well as his own, they go beyond Plato’s remarks; however, like Plato they understand the Batuóviov’s function in a negative manner, i.e., it does not provide positive encouragement or information but merely scended??7 warns against proposed actions. Yet this limitation is sometimes tran- Egypt in battle, he fled to Macedonian Pella, where he became so famous as a diviner and astrologer that Olympias, wife of Philip of Macedon, The most remarkable development of the idea of Socrates’ Saipédviov function, the öaıuovıov becomes a mysterious supernatural entity that is 336 How early this reputation was acquired is unknown, but it is generally acknowledged that the legend of Nectanebus predates Ps, -Cullisthenes (cf. Merkelbach, Quellen, pp. 57f.). 337 Ps. -Callisthenes 1. 1. See the discussion of Nectanebus’ magical technique of divination in Budge, Alexander, pp. xxxvii—xl. Ps. -Callisthenes (or at least book one) was translated from an older Egyptian work. €. H. Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1954), p. 59, suggests that an Alexandrian produced it in the third Christian century. Budge, Alexander, p. xxxvi, considered it probable that the Greek ander the Great (Cambridge: University Press, 1889). 335 Reinhold Merkelbach, Die Quellen des griechischen Alexander-Romans, Zetemata, 9 (Munich: 331 Ibid, 130D-E. Cf. Dorothy Tarrant, “The Touch of Socrates,” The Classical Quarterly, N.S., 8 (1958): 95-98. 332 Ibid., 131A. 333 Apul. De deo Soc. 20. 334 Greek Text: Wilhelm Kroll, ed., Historia Alexandri Magni, vol. 1 (Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung, 1926); Eng. trans. of Syriac version: Ernest A. W. Budge, ed., The History of Alex- 329 Ps, -Plat. Theag. 129E. 330 Ibid, 130A-E. is found in the pseudo-Platonic dialogue Theages””*. Besides its traditional daınövios doe dAnOwWs kat Gavuaordc. Windisch, Paulus und Christus, pp. 36-38, adduces 318 Plato nowhere says that Socrates was Gelos, but in Symp. 219C, Alcibiades describes him as several texts to show that Plato certainly understood Socrates as a true deios; in later writers Gevos became a common epithet for him. 319 Plat. Apol. 31C-D. 320 Ibid., 40A-C; in 31D Socrates says the voice prevented him from entering politics. 321 Ps. -Plat. Theag. 128D-E. 322 Ibid., 129A-C. 323 Ibid., 129D; Plut. De gen. 11 (581D). 324 Plut. De gen. 10 (580D-F). 325 Cíc. Div. 1. 54. 123. 326 Ibid.; Plut. De gen. 11 (581D-E). Cicero says that Antipater of Tarsus (fl. 144 B.C.) “gathered a mass of remarkable premonitions received by Socrates.” 327 Xen. Mem. 1. 1. 3-5. 328 W. R. M. Lamb, ed., Plato, 10 vols., LCL (London: W. Heinemann, 1927), 8:345, suggests the “Platon,” in PW, 20:2366f.). second century B.C. as the date of composition; others prefer an earlier date (H. Leisegang,

requested a meeting with him*** After predicting that Philip would eventually divorce her, Nectanebus proceeded to convince her that she would sleep with and bear a son by the god Ammon; this son in turn would avenge her against Philip’””. By his magic, Nectanebus first caused Olympias to dream that she slept with Ammon**°; subsequently, having transformed himself into the forms of a snake, Ammon, Heracles, and Dionysus, he himself slept with her and caused her to become pregnant with Alexander the Great?*!. Next, Nectanebus induced Philip to have a dream which convinced him that his wife was pregnant by a god’. Later, when Philip began to have doubts, Nectanebus, in the form of a large snake, entered the room where Philip and Olympias were and kissed the latter’* Before his death is recorded, three more examples of his power in divination and astrology are furnished: (1) he instructs Olympias as to the right hour to give birth to Alexander, (2) he tells Olympias that her position as Philip’s wife is presently secure, and (3) he predicts that he will be killed by his son”, Although the form of the Nectanebus legend in Pseudo-Callisthenes depicts Nectanebus as a magician who tried to pass himself off as Ammon**5, R. Merkelbach argued that ““Ursprünglich war der König der Gott.” This is based on his opinion that the Nectanebus legend’ “ist nur der letzte Ausläufer des alten ägyptischen iepds Aöyos, nach dem der jeweilige Pharas Sohn des Ammon und dann selbst wieder Verkörperung des Ammon ist und mit der Königin den Thronfolger erzeugt’’*** At any rate, those who told and heard the legend will probably have known of Nectanebus’ status as a son of Ammon in virtue of his status as Pharaoh. 16. Imouthes At least by around 600 B.C. Imouthes (= Imhotep), who had served as vizier and chief architect under the Egyptian king Djoser (27th cent.), was esteemed as a god**’. As early as Manetho (c. 280 B.C.) he was — 338 Ibid., 1. 2-4. 339 Ibid., 1.4. 340 Ibid, 1. 5. 341 Ibid., 1. 6f, 342 Ibid, 1. 7f. 343 Ibid., 1. 10. 344 Ibid, 1. 12, 14, 345 Ibid, 1. 7: Otrw uèv h "OAvumas émAaväro, Avôpwunivw poix ws Bed auvepxoneun, TAY Atyurriu Baowet. 346 Merkelbach, Quellen, p. 58. 347 Günther Roeder, “Imuthes,” in PW, 9:1213-15. On Imouthes in general see also Kurt H. Sethe, Imhotep, der Asklepios der À egypter, Untersuchungen zur Geschichte und Altertumskunde Aegyptens, 2. 4 (Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs, 1902). Pre-Christian Divine Miracle Workers 57 identified with Asclepius on the basis of their common fame as healing deities***. As was true in Asclepian worship, the cult of Imouthes, with temples in Memphis, Thebes, and Philae**®’, was characterized by overnight temple incubation, during which the god would appear to the sleeping suppliant and effect the healing, or at least reveal the cure**° . Specific healings are attested in the Imouthes Aretalogy (1—2nd cent. A.D.). Here the translator of an Egyptian book glorifying Imouthes/Asclepius introduces his work by relating how the god saved his mother from a quartan some point he also gained fame as a great astrologer **? . In his status as a fever and later himself from severe pain in his right side °°. This aretalogy also celebrates Imouthes as a god who delivers from perils at sea**?. At god he was regarded as the son of Ptah, who was identified as Hephaestus by the Egyptians*** . 17. Nechepso-Petosiris' In Ptolemaic Egypt a very influential magico-astrological work appeared (c. 150-152 B.C.) purporting to be authored by a certain Nechepso and a priest and counselor named Petosiris**°*. Although ‘‘Nechepso and Petosiris” may be pseudonyms for a single author, the fact that this book became a major textbook for later astrologers and healers ensured that these two Egyptian figures would be revered as great masters of astrological ally styled as 6 Baotrevs by others?**., In addition to the fact that Egyptian prediction and the iatromantic®®® art. Although within the work itself Nechepso was not described as a king so far as we know °°” , he is occasion- 348 FGrHist 609F2—3b (pp. 22f.); this assumes the correctness of the conjectural reading advocated by Sethe, /mhotep, p. 19. The correlation with Asclepius is clearly seen in the Imouthes Aretalogy (found in B, P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt, eds., The Oxyrhynchus Papyri [= POxy.], Part 11 [London: Egypt Exploration Fund, 1915], no. 1381). There is also evidence that Imouthes was sometimes assimilated to other gods: Harpocrates, Harsomtus, and Chnum of Elephantine (see Roeder, “Imuthes,” p. 1217). 349 Roeder, “Imuthes,” pp. 1215f. 350 POxy. 1381. 351 Ibid., cols. 3-7. I know of no healings or miracles attributed to the “earthly” Imouthes. 352 Ibid., col. 10, lines 214f. 353 Thus the alchemist Zosimus wrote a book on astrology entitled Iwovd. Cf. also Stob. Ecl. 1. 41, 44. 354 E.g., POxy. 1381, col. 9, lines 201f.; col. 11, lines 228f. Hieroglyphic evidence can be seen in Sethe, Imhotep, p. 4. of the Nechepso-Petosiris work (cf. Pieper, 355 The extant fragments have been edited by Ernst Riess, Philologus, Suppl. 6 (1891-93):325— 94; cf. also his Nechepsonis et Petosiridis fragmenta magica (Bonn: Caroli Georgi, 1890), and M. Pieper, “Nechepso,” in PW, 16:2160—67. 356 This subject was treated in the fourteenth book “Nechepso,” pp. 2162f.). 357 Pieper, “Nechepso,” p. 2167. 358 Ibid., p. 2160; Vett. Val. 6. 1. Manetho knew a King Nechepso of the twenty-sixth Saite dynasty (FGrHist 609F2-3c [pp. 48f.]).

kings were viewed as gods, one fragment of this work related a heavenly al souls ascent during which Nechepso had conversations with ‘immort and sage and divine holy thoughts” °°. For his part Petosiris is a priest who “had discussions with various orders of gods and angels” 360 It may ”’. priest of also be possible that he was identified by some with the high from the Thoth on whose grave the following graffitti, perhaps dating To(r) middle of the third century B.C., was discovered: Ileróoeupw avd Kata x0ovòs vékvv, vûv & Ev Oeoior Keinevov uerà oopor aoga(v)y> 18. Zoroaster pride of Among Eastern wise men of repute in the Hellenistic_world Zoroaster place should perhaps be given to the Persian Zarathushtra, or or as he was known in the West?°? . Born in Bactria in perhaps the sixth the seventh century B.C.°** , this religious innovator who established was lous details of his life’. According to Pliny, Zoroaster’s precocity as the first worship of Ahura-Mazdä was known to the Hellenistic world and of the Magi and the teacher of Pythagoras — a great prophet, magician, ?°* . Despite this reputation Hellenistic authors reveal few miracuastrologer Riess, Philologus, Supp. 6, Frag. 1. (= Vett. Val. 6. 1); Eng. trans. by Hengel, Judaism and Helthrobbed revealed when, on the day of his birth, he laughed and “his brain so violently as to dislodge a hand placed on his head’”’*°* . Dio relates the tradition that once when Zoroaster was in meditation upon a mountain, 359 lenism, 1:214. 33 (= Procl. 2. 344 [Kroll]). 360 Riess, Philologus, Suppl. 6, Frag. 361 Pieper, “‘Nechepso,” pp. 2164f.; see Gustave Lefebvre, Le tombeau de Petosiris, 3 vols. (Cairo: Impr. de l’Institut français d’archéologie orientale, 1923-24). 362 Useful resources for the study of Zoroaster include Joseph Bidez and Franz Cumont, Les . Mages Hellenises (= Bidez-Cumont), 2 vols. (Paris: Société d’Editions “Les Belles Lettres,” 1938), 1:3-163; 2:7—263; E. Herzfeld, Zoroaster and His World, 2 vols. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1947); W. B. Henning, Zoroaster — Politician or Witch-Doctor? (London: Oxford University Press, 1951); J. Duchesne-Guillemin, The Western Response to Zoroaster (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1958); and W. Winz, Zarathustra (Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1961). 363 Traditional Greek dating was much earlier; cf. Diog. Laert. 1. 2. 364 First Magi: Dio Chrys. 36. 40; Diog. Laert. 1. 2; teacher of Pythagoras: Apul. Apol. 31; idem Flor. 15; Clem. A. Strom. 1. 15. 69; Porph. Vit. Pyth. 12; prophet: Diod. Sic. 1. 94. 2; Plut. Num. 4. 7; Clem. A. Strom. 1.15.69, 21.133 (where Alexander Polyhistor knows an identification of Zoroaster with Ezekiel); on Zoroaster as a prophet in Mazdean sources see Bidez-Cumont, 1:28f.; in the post-Christian period it was believed that he had predicted Jesus’ birth (BidezCumont, 1:51f.; 2:117-35); magician: Ps. -Plat. Alc. 1. 121E-122A; Pliny Hist. Nat. 30. 2. 3f.; Apul. Apol. 26, 90; on the books of magic ascribed to Zoroaster see Bidez-Cumont, 1:143— 50; 2:242—48; astrologer: see the astrological works attributed to Zoroaster in Bidez-Cumont, 2:207-42. 365 For a convenient collection of Zoroastrian texts in Eng. translation which relate various miracles performed by Zoroaster see Mary Boyce, ed. and trans., Textual Sources for the Study of Zoroastrianism (Totowa, N.J.: Barnes and Noble Books, 1984), pp. 72-77. 366 Hist. Nat. 7.16.72. Pre-Christian Divine Miracle Workers 59 fire from heaven enveloped the summit and burned continuously. However, when the Persian king and his nobles approached to worship the deity, Zoroaster, unharmed by the fire, stepped forward and “bade them to be the god’s having come to that place”**’ . Zoroaster died, according to on of of good cheer (8appeiv) and to offer certain sacrifices in recogniti Malalas, when he prayed that Orion would consume him with heavenly fire 368. This is clearly a variant of a tradition deposited in the PseudoClementines: the Persians worship Zoroaster at a temple marking the burial site of his remains since a chariot of lightning transported his soul to heaven as a living star %°. In addition to this reference to the worship of Zoroaster, his exalted status is attested by the notion that his father was Ahura-Mazda himself, and that his advent on earth was the result of a descent from heaven through the fiery ether *”°. 19. Moses To complete our survey of the divine miracle workers of the pre-Christian period, it is necessary to move from the pagan sphere to the figure of Moses as he was understood by certain Hellenistic-Jewish authors?”. A series of distinguished scholars have argued with considerable force that Artapanus, Philo, and Josephus have transformed (or at least reflect the transformation of) Moses the O.T. prophet, the man of God, into a true 367 Dio Chrys. 36. 40. 368Johannes Malalas Anonymi Chronologica 20 (p. 84B in J. -P. Migne, Patrologiae, Series Graecae, vol. 97); cf. Suda, ‘““Zwpedotpns.” 369 Ps. -Clem. Recog. 4. 27f.; idem Hom. 9. Af. The author of Recog. adds his polemical version: the demon whom Zoroaster was using to bring down sparks from the stars became incensed at the latter’s constant demands and consumed him with fire. 1:24, says 370 Ps. -Plat. Alc. 1. 122A; Hermippus in Arnobius Adv, Nat. 1. 52. Bidez-Cumont, Judaism, there are other O.T. prophets and miracle workers for whom that neither of these assertions have to do with “une filiation réelle,” but the poetic assertions of some could easily be understood as literal descriptions by others. 371 On Moses’ reputation among gentiles see John Gager’s Moses in Greco-Roman Paganism, SBLMS, 16 (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1972), esp. pp. 134-61 (“Moses and Magic”). is viewed as the most obvious example of an O.T. hero transformed into a Although Moses @eios àvnp by Hellenistic this claim has been made (e.g., see Bieler, @EIOZ ANHP, 2:28f.): (1) Solomon, whose wisdom enabled him to exorcize demons (Jos. Ant. 8. 45—49), was regarded de Belav éxovrt 8 dvowv (ibid., 8. 34; cf. 8. 187), (2) Jereboam, rebuked by the prophet Jadon, called him a 8@eïov 138), (4) adnOws Kal mpopnrnv dptorov (ibid., 8. 243), (3) Elijah was &v6eos (Philo Jmmut. Elisha during his life and after his death possessed a 6 Úvauw Belav (Jos. Ant. 9. 183), (5) Isaiah’s predictions qualified him as a prophet ÖnoAoyovuevws Defoe Kal Bavudoros (ibid., 10. 35), Oerórnroc mapa (6) Daniel, on account of his beneficent and true predictions, received &dtav (ibid., 18. 64). rois dxAors (ibid., 10. 268), and (7) the prophets as a whole are 6 efor mpopñras and (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1968), pp. 79-98, and Howard C. Kee, “The Socio-Religious Setting Here it isalso appropriate to mention the exalted status enjoyed by Joseph in the romance Joseph and Asenath (cf. esp. chapters Sf.; also Marc Philonenko, Joseph et Asenath, SPB, Aims of Joseph and Asenath,” in Society of Biblical Literature 1976 Seminar Papers, ed. G. Mac-