Alexandria

Edited By George Hinge And Jens A. Krasilnikoff

Description

Throughout the entire span of Graeco-Roman antiquity, Alexandria represented a meeting place for many ethnic cultures and the city itself was subject to a wide range of local developments, which created and formatted a distinct Alexandrine 'culture' as well as several distinct 'cultures'. Ancient Greek, Roman and Jewish observers communicated or held claim to that particular message. Hence, Arrian, Theocritus, Strabo, and Athenaeus reported their fascination with the Alexandrine melting pot to the wider world as did Philo, Josephus and Clement. In various fashions, the four papers of Part I of the volume, Alexandria from Greece and Egypt, deal with the relationship between Ptolemaic Alexandria and its Greek past. However, the Egyptian origin and heritage also plays important roles for the arguments. The contributions to the second part of the book are devoted to discussions of various aspects of contact and development between Rome, Judaism and Christianity.

Sujets

• Ancient history
• Classics

Informations

• Publié par: Aarhus University Press
• Date de parution: 31 décembre 2009
• Nombre de lectures: 0
• EAN13: 9788779347458
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 4 Mo

Extrait

Alexandria A Cultural and Religious Melting Pot

Aarhus Studies in Mediterranean Antiquity (ASMA)

IX

ASMA îs a serîes wîc wî be pubîsed approxîmatey once a year by he Centre or te Study o Antîquîty, Unîversîty o Aarus, Denmark.

he Centre îs a network o cooperatîng departments: Greek and atîn, Cassîca Ar- caeoogy, Hîstory, and te Facuty o heoogy. he objectîve o te serîes îs to advance te înterdîscîpînary study o Antîquîty by pubîsîng artîces, e.g., conerence papers, or îndependent monograps, wîc among oter tîngs relect te current actîvîtîes o te centre.

Alexandria A Cultural and ReligiousMeltingPot Edîted by George Hînge and Jens A. Krasînîkof

Aarhus University Press |

Alexandria. A Cultural and Religious Melting Pot © Aarhus University Press and the authors 2009

Cover by Jørgen Sparre Illustration: Roman mosaic from Palestrina. Archaeological Museum © 1990. Photo Scala, Florence – courtesy of the Ministero Beni e Att. Culturali Typeset with Minion

eISBN 978 87 7934 745 8 ISSN 1399 2686

Aarhus University Press Langelandsgade 177

DK-8200 Aarhus N www.unipress.dk

White Cross Mills Hightown, Lancaster, LA1 4XS United Kingdom www.gazellebookservices.co.uk

PO Box 511 Oakville, CT 06779 www.oxbowbooks.com

Published with the financial support of The Aarhus University Research Foundation The Danish Research Council for the Humanities

PREFACE

he Centre or te Study o Medîterranean Antîquîty at te Unîversîty o Aarus îs a researc orum or te advancement o înterdîscîpînary studîes o Antîquîty. he domînant actîvîty o te Centre îs to arrange semînars and conerences and to pubîs te contrîbutîons rom tese events în monograps. Addîtîonay, severa îndîvîdua monograps ave been pubîsed în te Centres serîes, Aarus Studîes în Medîterranean Antîquîty (ASMA). he Centres semînars and conerences are devoted to te study o suc sîgnîicant ieds and topîcs tat wî beneit rom an înterdîscîpînary approac. he pubîcatîons o te Centre îs tereore relectîons o te ongoîng process, wîc bînds te varîous ieds o actîvîty togeter at te Unîversîty o Aarus, and between our unîversîty and te înternatîona scoary communîty.  ïn May 2004 te Centre osted an înternatîona semînar on Aexandrîa. Severa dîs- tînguîsed coeagues rom dîferent countrîes contrîbuted to tîs semînar, bot as gîvers o papers and as dîscussants. Some o tese papers ave been încuded în tîs voume, wîe oter contrîbutîons ave been added ater. Fîrst o a, our warmest tanks to te contrîbutors or teîr proessîona and scoary approac and teîr patîence regardîng te preparatîon o tîs voume. he dîstînguîsed Members o te Board o te Centre or te Study o Medîterranean Antîquîty, deserves our gratîtude because o teîr never aîîng entusîasm and encouragement and Aarus Unîversîty Researc Foundatîon or makîng te necessary donatîons avaîabe în te irst pace; and te Danîs Researc Councî or Cuture and Communîcatîon or inancîa support o te pubîcatîon. ast but not east we extend our gratîtude to te researc assîstants and secretarîes, wîtout wose ep and support none o tîs woud ave appened.

Aarus, December 2008 George Hînge and Jens A. Krasînîkof

Preface

5

PART II. ROME, JUDAISM AND CHRISTIANITY

Chapter 2 Theatrical Fiction and Visual Bilingualism in the Monumental Tombs of Ptolemaic Alexandria Marjorie Susan Venit

PART I. ALEXANDRIA FROM GREECE AND EGYPT

Introduction George Hinge and Jens A. Krasilnikoff

CONTENTS

97

Chapter 1 Alexandria asPlace: TempoSpatial Traits of Royal Ideology in Early Ptolemaic Egypt Jens A. Krasilnikoff

66

42

80

Chapter 3 Language and Race: Theocritus and the Koine Identity of Ptolemaic Egypt George Hinge

Chapter 4 Homeric Scholarship in Alexandria Minna Skafte Jensen

Chapter 5 Philo as a Polemist and a Political Apologist An Investigation of his Two Historical TreatisesAgainst FlaccusandThe Embassy to Gaius Per Bilde

115

9

Chapter 6 Alexandrian Judaism: Rethinking a Problematic Cultural Category Anders Klostergaard Petersen

21

144

158

176

Chapter 7 From School to Patriarchate: Aspects on the Christianisation of Alexandria Samuel Rubenson

Chapter 8 Religious Conflict in Late Antique Alexandria: Christian Responses to “Pagan” Statues in the Fourth and Fifth Centuries CE Troels Myrup Kristensen

List of Contributors

George Hînge and Jens A. Krasînîkof

INTRODUCTION

he apprecîatîon amongst te înternatîona ost o scoars o ancîent Aexandrîa as a ied o researc as been growîng tese recent years and one can even suggest tat ît as been acceeratîng wîtîn te past tree decades or more. he contînued înterest îs manîested în încreased knowedge o te materîa cuture o Ptoemaîc and Roman Aexandrîa, and te încrease în te pubîcatîon rate o papyrî manuscrîpts and oter evîdence rom Egypt contînues to ue scoary debate. Moreover, te growîng înter- est among scoars o te umanîtîes wordwîde în te menta aspects o past socîetîes învîtes to deveop te tenets o cutura îstory, anguage and reîgîon wîtîn te wîder rame o ancîent Aexandrîa.  hîs project was conceîved în 2002 as part o te contînued dîscussîon and cartîng o te current and uture actîvîtîes o Centre or te Study o Medîterranean Antîquîty. he Centre board agreed to te sîmpe observatîon tat most o te partakers o te Centre were a someow researcîng aspects o Egypt’s cuture, îstory, or reîgîons o te Graeco-Roman perîod. Furter ponderîng suggested tat tîs rater board scope soud be narrowed down to just “Aexandrîa,” în partîcuar tose aspects o te Aex- andrîne past, wîc encompassed te aorementîoned aspects o cutura îstory, îstory and reîgîon. hus, atoug prevîous researc projects ave successuy navîgated te dîIcut waters o înterdîscîpînary researc muc reward was to be expected rom te însîstence upon te combînatîon o a wîde tematîc scope examîned wîtîn te conines o te wîde cronoogîca spectrum. Consequenty, as severa contrîbutîons demonstrate and observe, te Aexandrîne past îs notorîousy marked by meetîng o cutures and requent and rapîd deveopment, wîc îs quîte dîIcut to grasp în îts totaîty î te onger perspectîve îs îgnored. Addîtîonay, te ong-ed însîstence o te “act” tat Aexandrîa represented a word totay dîferent rom te parae cutura and poîtîca construct o tradîtîona Egyptîan cuture îs aso beîng caenged. And so are dîferent aspects o te reîgîous and pîosopîca mîîeus, wîc deveoped amost rom te oundatîon o te cîty to ate Antîquîty and te begînnîng o te Mîdde Ages.  As te tîte o tîs voume suggests, trougout te entîre span o Graeco-Roman antîquîty Aexandrîa represented a meetîng pace or many etnîc cutures and te cîty îtse was subject to a wîde range o oca deveopments, wîc created and ormatted a dîstînct Aexandrîne “cuture” as we as severa dîstînct “cutures”. Ancîent Greek, Roman and Jewîs observers communîcated or ed caîm to tat partîcuar message. Hence, Arrîan, heocrîtus, Strabo, and Atenaeus reported teîr ascînatîon o te Aexandrîne metîng pot to te wîder word and so dîd Pîo, Josepus and Cement.

Introduction

9

10

 As some o te revîewers observed one îs în serîous danger o beîng trounced by te seer amount o înormatîon, îe, abundance, îngenuîty and vîgour, wîc or some tîme became “Aexandrîa” by te accompîsment o Fraser’s monoîtîcPtoemaîc Aexandrîarom 1972. Fraser’s “antîquarîan” (î tîs word as a posîtîve connotatîon) reconstructîon and “compîatîon” o Aexandrîa untî te comîng o Rome contînue to eave us în te state o Strabo, sîgty bewîdered and overwemed. We sa, noneteess, însîst tat te Aexandrîne metîng pot made up a dîstînct order, one o dîferent not aways correspondîng, abîdîng and endurîng eements o cutura ama- gamatîons.  Recenty, te German proessor Crîstîan Meîer argued or te exîstence o “Europe’s specîa pat,” în order to expaîn te reatîve success o Europe în domînatîng te remaîn- der o te word în te courses o te nîneteent and twentîet centurîes. Meîer ancors te begînnîng o Europe în Greece, more accuratey în Atens o te it century BCE, were e ocuses on te democratîc înstîtutîons, cîtîzensîp, reedom to debate and a irm beîe în te posîtîve efect o “te debate” or a posîtîve uture deveopment. Mutîpe objectîons and correctîons can be made agaînst Meîer’s ypotesîs. One îs te act tat Europe woud not ave been wat ît became wîtout an Aexandrîa to take în and urter deveop wat ît înerîted rom te Greek and Near Eastern words.  Tîme, acceeratîon and voume are eatures tat domînated te deveopment o Aexandrîne îstory, but aso paucîty, contempatîon and stabîîty. he mîdy stressed Strabo woud ave acknowedged bot te ambîguîtîes and te “beat” o Aexandrîa. Here, în te argest cîty known to mankînd – ater ony surpassed by Rome – te mutî- etnîc and înternatîonaîsed communîty însîsted upon settîng te standards în and o a gobaîsed word. Aexandrîa tus became te centre or communîcatîon o scîentîic and scoary acîevements as we as reîgîous novetîes, dîgressîon and deveopment. Aexandrîne “cuture” came to sîgnîy novety and speed, but aso degeneratîon and te target o te specîa versîons o eary “Orîentaîsm’.  ïn varîous asîons, te our papers o Part ï o te monograp,Alexandria from Greece and Egypt,deas wît te reatîonsîp between Ptoemaîc Aexandrîa and îts Greek past. However, te Egyptîan orîgîn and erîtage aso pays împortant roes or te arguments. ïn te irst contrîbutîon o te voume, Jens A. Krasînîkof dîscusses and expores te potentîas o umanîstîc geograpy as a teoretîca toos and approac or te study o te earîest Aexandrîne îstory. hus, wît exampes o ow Aexandrîa was created aspace, Krasînîkof argues tat te cîty o Aexander dîfered undamen- tay orm te majorîty o cassîca and Heenîstîc cîtîes. he evîdence suggests tat te ruers o Aexandrîa were soon to create teîr own standards o urbanîsm, conspîcuous consumptîon and cutura amagamatîon în cose resonance wît a proound excusîve- ness o îts roya îdeoogy. Undoubtedy, te eîrs o Aexander exercîsed great împact upon te reîgîons and cutura amagams o te cîty. Concurrenty, owever, tey aso subscrîbed to te înstîtutîons and tradîtîons o te cassîca Greek poîs, a domînant eature în te ancîent îterary tradîtîon on and about Aexandrîa. Paradoxîcay, te acute need o te irst Ptoemaîc ruers to create Aexandrîa înto a dîstînct, unîque and se- preservîng urban entîty în îts own rîgt demanded tat te cîty o Aexander was made

Alexandria