I just recently started meeting with some colleagues and a student in a Greek reading group. I suggested to a colleague in Classics that it might be interesting to read Philo of Alexandria together, and she got very excited about the idea, and some other colleagues in Religion also expressed an interest.
And so lately, I have felt disconcertingly like I am back in Greek class, wondering why the verses that I end up with when it is my turn to read and translate are so difficult, while those others end up with seem comparatively easy. Of course, if I had been preparing for โclassโ as I should have been, I probably would not have felt that way. ๐
But kidding aside, it is intended to be a low-pressure, enjoyable experience in which we read and if necessary muddle through together. Although weโve only met twice, I am already finding it a really rewarding experience. Doing this is relatively straightforward thanks to the availability online without cost of editions of the Greek text, as well as Yongeโs older English translation.
We are reading his โOn the Creationโ (known in Latin as De opificio mundi and in the original Greek as ฮ ฮตฯฮน ฯฮทฯ ฮบฮฑฯฮฑ ฮฯฯ ฯฮตฮฑ ฮบฮฟฯฮผฮฟฯฮฟฮนฮนฮฑฯ). It is worth reading for many reasons, not least of which is the clear evidence it provides that the so-called literalism of some contemporary interpreters is not โthe traditional approachโ to the creation accounts in Genesis. III.13 is particularly illustrative:
แผฮพ ฮดแฝฒ แผกฮผฮญฯฮฑฮนฯ ฮดฮทฮผฮนฮฟฯ ฯฮณฮทฮธแฟฮฝฮฑฮฏ ฯฮทฯฮน ฯแฝธฮฝ ฮบฯฯฮผฮฟฮฝ, ฮฟแฝฮบ แผฯฮตฮนฮดแฝด ฯฯฮฟฯฮตฮดฮตแฟฯฮฟ ฯฯฯฮฝฯฮฝ ฮผฮฎฮบฮฟฯ ฯ แฝ ฯฮฟฮนแฟถฮฝ โ แผ ฮผฮฑ ฮณแฝฐฯ ฯฮฌฮฝฯฮฑ ฮดฯแพถฮฝ ฮตแผฐฮบแฝธฯ ฮธฮตฯฮฝ, ฮฟแฝ ฯฯฮฟฯฯฮฌฯฯฮฟฮฝฯฮฑ ฮผฯฮฝฮฟฮฝ แผฮปฮปแฝฐ ฮบฮฑแฝถ ฮดฮนฮฑฮฝฮฟฮฟฯฮผฮตฮฝฮฟฮฝย โย , แผฮปฮปโ แผฯฮตฮนฮดแฝด ฯฮฟแฟฯ ฮณฮนฮฝฮฟฮผฮญฮฝฮฟฮนฯ แผฮดฮตฮน ฯฮฌฮพฮตฯฯ. ฯฮฌฮพฮตฮน ฮดแฝฒ แผฯฮนฮธฮผแฝธฯ ฮฟแผฐฮบฮตแฟฮฟฮฝ, แผฯฮนฮธฮผแฟถฮฝ ฮดแฝฒ ฯฯฯฮตฯฯ ฮฝฯฮผฮฟฮนฯ ฮณฮตฮฝฮฝฮทฯฮนฮบฯฯฮฑฯฮฟฯ แฝ แผฮพยท ฯแฟถฮฝ ฯฮต ฮณแฝฐฯ แผฯแฝธ ฮผฮฟฮฝฮฌฮดฮฟฯ ฯฯแฟถฯฮฟฯ ฯฮญฮปฮตฮนฯฯ แผฯฯฮนฮฝ แผฐฯฮฟฯฮผฮตฮฝฮฟฯ ฯฮฟแฟฯ แผฮฑฯ ฯฮฟแฟฆ ฮผฮญฯฮตฯฮน ฮบฮฑแฝถ ฯฯ ฮผฯฮปฮทฯฮฟฯฮผฮตฮฝฮฟฯ แผฮพ ฮฑแฝฯแฟถฮฝ, แผกฮผฮฏฯฮฟฯ ฯ ฮผแฝฒฮฝ ฯฯฮนฮฌฮดฮฟฯ, ฯฯฮฏฯฮฟฯ ฮดแฝฒ ฮดฯ ฮฌฮดฮฟฯ, แผฮบฯฮฟฯ ฮดแฝฒ ฮผฮฟฮฝฮฌฮดฮฟฯ, ฮบฮฑแฝถ แฝกฯ แผฯฮฟฯ ฮตแผฐฯฮตแฟฮฝ แผฯฯฮทฮฝ ฯฮต ฮบฮฑแฝถ ฮธแฟฮปฯ ฯ ฮตแผถฮฝฮฑฮน ฯฮญฯฯ ฮบฮต ฮบแผฮบ ฯแฟฯ แผฮบฮฑฯฮญฯฮฟฯ ฮดฯ ฮฝฮฌฮผฮตฯฯ แผฅฯฮผฮฟฯฯฮฑฮนยท แผฯฯฮตฮฝ ฮผแฝฒฮฝ ฮณแฝฐฯ แผฮฝ ฯฮฟแฟฯ ฮฟแฝฯฮน ฯแฝธ ฯฮตฯฮนฯฯฯฮฝ, ฯแฝธ ฮดโ แผฯฯฮนฮฟฮฝ ฮธแฟฮปฯ ยท ฯฮตฯฮนฯฯแฟถฮฝ ฮผแฝฒฮฝ ฮฟแฝฮฝ แผฯฮนฮธฮผแฟถฮฝ แผฯฯแฝด ฯฯฮนฮฌฯ, ฮดฯ แฝฐฯ ฮดโ แผฯฯฮฏฯฮฝ, แผก ฮดโ แผฮผฯฮฟแฟฮฝ ฮดฯฮฝฮฑฮผฮนฯ แผฮพฮฌฯ.
Iโll offer my own rough translation of the first sentence: โHe says that in six days the world was fashioned โ not ย because the Maker required a length of time (for it is natural for God to accomplish everything at once, not only in commanding but even in thinking), but because the things being brought into being required arrangement. And numbers administer arrangementโฆโ
The rest finds mathematical significance in the number six. None of what Philo writes on this topic in the passage bears even the slightest resemblance to how modern-day fundamentalists approach the text.
I wonder how many people who read this blog have ever read Philo in Greek. This is my first time trying to read an entire work of his in the original language, and is an expression of my longstanding desire to read more in Greek beyond the New Testament. I am grateful to colleagues in Classics for joining me in doing so โ and hope we can keep it up!