Professional Documents
Culture Documents
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to International Journal of the
Classical Tradition.
http://www.jstor.org
DOI 10.1007/sl2138-011-0264-l
Stance
The
Philosophical
and
Stoicism
Platonism,
its
Pagan
in
Origen
and
Plato1
Dialogue
of
Allegory
in
in
Reception
and
Christian:
with
the
Stoics
MediaB.V.2011
Science+Business
Springer
336
2011
International
/September
Journal
oftheClassicalTradition
and thetelosand,
withPlato'smythson thearkhe
Origenevenentersin conversation
ifnecessary,
corrects
them,and directly
comparesthemwiththebiblicalstorieson the
and die telos.
arkhe
I.
role of allegory in Stoicism,fromthe Old Stoa to Neostoicism or
Roman Stoicism,is philosophicallyremarkable,as allegory- and espeThe ciallyallegoresis,i.e. theallegoricalexegesis ofmyths,rituals,etc.- was
in Stoicism.Indeed, I have argued extensively,
part and parcel of philosophy
fortheStoics,farfrombeing
thatallegorywas philosophy
and I hope forcefully,
a mereetymologizing(althoughetymologies,especiallyofepithetsofdeities,
were importantin Stoicism,and interpretedin both a physicaland an ethical
/rhetoricaldevice
key).2Stoic allegorywas not,or certainlynotonly,a literary
in its value.
or skhma,
but it was primarilyphilosophical
Allegoresis had been used since the very beginning of Stoicism,from
Zeno' s commentarieson Homer and Hesiod onwards.3Cleanthes also enof archaicpoetry,even proposingtexgaged in the allegoricalinterpretation
tual emendationsthatsupportedit.He was convincedthatpoetryis theaptest
way to expressthesublimityof what is divine:
Cleanthes maintainsthatpoetic and musical models are better.For
the rationaldiscourse [Aoyos]of philosophyadequately reveals divine and human things,but,per se, it does not possess appropriate
expressions[Xesisoimai] to conveytheaspects ofdivine greatness
This is why meter,melodies,and rhythmsreach,inso[0sa Msy0ri].
faras possible,thetruthofthecontemplationofdivinerealities(SVF
1.486).
Consistentlywiththis,
Cleanthes [...] used to state thatthe divinitiesare mysticalfigures
and sacred names [KqoeisUpa], thatthesun is
[muotikoc
oxtmgtcx]
a bearer of the sacred torch,and that the universe is a mystery
and used to call those inspiredby the divinitiespriests
[jjuoTripiov],
of
capable initiatingpeople to mysteries[teeotcx](SVF 1.538).4
e problemidel pensiero
Temimetafisici
2. See I. Ramelli,Allegoria
, I, L'etclassica,
disantico98,Milan:Vitae Pensiero,
2004,chs.1 and 9, also withwide-ranging
I
add
I
refer
readers
and
now
to
which
cussionofexisting
Metaphor,
scholarship,
andModern
Revisions
Ancient
Tradition.
, ed. G.R.
; andtheClassical
Thought
Allegory
Oxford:OxfordUniversity
Press,2003,and TheCambridge
CompanBoys-Stones,
iontoAllegory
CUP,2010(a review
, eds. R. Copelandand P.T.Struck,
Cambridge:
in thisJournal).
ReviewsofAllegoria,
articleon whichis forthcoming
I, byF.FerMawr
Review
Classical
95 (2007)979-983;R. Chiappiniello,
rari,Athenaeum
Bryn
2006;M.N. Bustos,Stylos14 (2005)182-187.
dell'eth
classica
3. See Ramelli,Allegoria
,
, I (above,n. 2), ch.2.1-2;eadem,Allegoristi
ReMilan:Bompiani,
2007,ch.1,section2,onZeno,withtextsandcommentaries.
viewedbyM. Herrerode Huregui,7/w13(2008)333-334.
textsand commentaries
I (above,n. 2),ch.2.3;therelevant
4. See Ramelli,Allegoria,
dell'et
areinAllegoristi
classica(above,n. 3),ch.1,section3, on Cleanthes.
337
Ramelli
mostrecently,
5. See forinstance,
,
J.B.Gourinatand J.Barnes,eds.,Lirelesstociens
de France,2009,withreviewby I. Ramelliin Bryn
Paris:Pressesuniversitaires
2010.
MazvrClassicalReview
delletaclassica(above,n.3),
I (above,n.2),ch.2.4;Allegonsti
6. See Ramelli,
Allegoria,
textsand commentaries.
withtherelevant
ch.1,section4, on Chrysippus,
338
2011
International
/September
Journal
oftheClassicalTradition
339
Ramelli
or CompendiumTheologiae
goresis applied to the Greek gods, the'ETTi5po|JTi
Graecae,in the conclusion ( 35), Cornutusdeclares that
Ox oi TuxovTEssysvovTOoi TTaXaiot,ccAKai auviEvai t]v toi
komou4>aiv iKavoi Kai Tipos to 5icxaupoXcovKai aiviyijaTcov
<j>iAooo<J>r|aai
nepi auTjs EUETT<J>opoi.
The ancientswere notpeople ofno account,but theywere bothable
to understandthenatureof thecosmos and well capable ofexpressing philosophical truthson it throughsymbolsand allusions.
Allegoresisperformsthe verytask of findingthe philosophical truthunder
theveil ofriddles.This is why itbelongs,and mustnecessarilybelong,to philosophy.Cornutusprobablyjoined theMiddle Stoic (Posidonian: see Sen. Ep.
90) idea of theexcellenceof thefirsthuman beings,who could directlyaccess
thetruthand expressed it throughmythsand rituals,to theOld Stoic notion
of directand common access to truthby means of common innatenotionsor
Koivai Evvoiai.The resultwas the supportof the inclusionof allegoricalexegesis in philosophy,as an importantaspect of philosophyitself.For each divinity,from Ouranos to Hades, Cornutus in his handbook provides an
ofitsnames and epithets,itsattributes,
allegorical-etymological
interpretation
and
and
so
on. Physicalallegory(Zeus represents
of
its
rituals,
myths
aspects
the ether,Hera the air,etc.) is prevalent,althoughthereare also examples of
ethicaland even historicalexegeses.
From Cornutus' (and Chrysippus') perspective,poetry and the other
formsof transmissionof ancient "theology,"such as rituals,culticepithets,
and visual representations,
expressvarious truthsin a symbolicway,whichalmust
This
, and more specifically
decrypt.
operationis philosophical
legoresis
the
truth
on
nature
and
the
since
its
is
object
divinity;in the Stoic
theological
immanentistic
framework,
indeed,divinityand natureare coextensive,so that
theologyand physicsare one and the same or rathertwo sides of thesame
coin and allegoresisreveals thisveryidentity.In thisconnection,etymology
was abundantly employed in Stoicism in the service of philosophical allegoresis,but the latteris farfrombeing reduced to an etymologizing,as has
sometimesbeen assumed.9Etymologyitselfwas an expressionof the Stoics'
philosophicaltheoryof language, accordingto which names are "by nature"
in thatthe "firstsounds" (TTpcTai<(>cova)imitatedthe objects,and
(<J>oEi),
286-289.On Cornuto
areexpressly
based (see "Vorwort,"
p. VII) theintroduction,
Einberblick
andnotesofthevolumeCornutus:
DieGriechischen
Gtter.
translation,
undDeutungen
berNamen
, Bilder
, hrsg.v.H.-G.Nesselrath,
eingel.,bers,u. m.inH.-J.Klauck,I. Ramelli
terpretierenden
Essaysvers.v.F.Berdozzo,G. Boys-Stones,
u. A.V.Zadorojnyi,
SAPERE14,Tbingen:MohrSiebeck,2009.
P.Steinmetz,
9. See,forinstance,
Deutungundallegorische
Dichtung
"Allegorische
in deraltenStoa,"Rheinisches
Museum129(1986)18-29;in partalso A.A. Long,
in Philoand Etymology
in Stoicism:a Plea forDrawingDistinctions,"
"Allegory
TheStudiaPhilonica
Annual9 (1997)198-210,
esp. 200-201.See also J.Tate,"Cornutusand thePoets,"ClassicalQuarterly
23 (1929)41-45;idem,"Platoand Alle24 (1930)1-10,esp. 3; idem,"On the
ClassicalQuarterly
goricalInterpretation,"
ClassicalQuarterly
28 (1934)105-114.
HistoryofAllegorism,"
340
2011
International
/September
Journal
oftheClassicalTradition
on thisbasis names were constituted.Etymologywas conceived as an instrumentboth fortheunderstandingof thetruenatureof thegods, given thatetymologygoes back to theauthenticmeaningofa name,and forshowinghow
traditionalnames and epithetsof deitiesreflecttheirnature,physicalor ethical. This same natureis expressed allegoricallyin myths.Etymologydemonofthetraditionsconcerningthegods
stratesthattheallegoricalinterpretation
is not a mere intellectualgame, but thatit is "true" (Itumo),in thatetymology,accordingto theStoic linguistictheory,has a directgrasp on nature.This
is why it is a privilegedinstrumentof allegory.
One may wonder why the Stoics attached to allegory such a philosophical
prominence.This issue in turnbears on thequestion of therole of allegoryin
Stoicism,whichI do notbelieve was simplyto supportStoic philosophy(in a
merely"apologetic" line). This mighthave been the case at thebeginningof
Stoicism,but less so in the day of Chrysippus,and even less in thatof Corof mythswas a
nutus. It is obviously the case thatthe Stoics' interpretation
as is shown forinstanceby Book 2 ofChrysippus'On DiStoicinterpretation,
vinities,
, in which the material fromHesiod, Homer, and other poets was
adapted to Stoictheologysuch as expounded in Book 1 ofthesame work.The
merely"apologetic" explanation,however,is unsatisfyingvis--vis the apparentlygrowinginterestin allegoresisamong theStoics,and theirgrowingallegoricalproduction.Ifallegoresiswas merelymeantto prove thetruthofthe
doctrinesof the Stoics, one should expect a declineof theirinterestin allegoresisof mythover time,when theStoic systemcould stand by itself.Moreover,in such a rigorousand structuredsystem,at a certainpoint thesupport
of theallegoricalexegesis of Homer and othermythologicaland cultictraditionswould have proved too unsystematicand episodic to be helpfulto a significantextent.
oftheRather,I suspectthatStoicismintendedto servetheinterpretation
ological poems and, more generally,aimed at integratinginto its own philosophical system the traditional expressions of theology poetic, cultic,
a
broad
cultural
creation
of
synthesis,iniconographie... witha view to the
but
traditional
die
philosophicallylegitimizedin the due
heritage,
cluding
forms.This meant a rvaluationof myth,in its various traditionalexpressions- rituals,epithets,poetry,iconography,... - as beareroftruth,afterithad
been corrodedby rationalisticcriticism.The Stoics,interestedas theywere in
intendedto validate poetryand
poetry,and literature,
linguistics,etymology,
otherexpressionsof mythand theology,by means of allegoresisaccordingto
theirown philosophicalsystem.Such a validationwas probablymeantto constructa broad and organic cultural unity,systematicand comprehensive,
based on the Logos.10This is clear,forinstance,in Chrysippusand Posidonius. Indeed, thewhole of theStoic allegoricaldiscourse revolvesaround the
Logos. It is the Logos-Pneuma of which the various deities are partialmanifestations;theLogos inspiredthepoets and thecreatorsofmythsand rituals,
and of the "natural" language which etymologytends to reveal,in orderto
I (above,n. 2),ch.9.
10. See Ramelli,Allegoria,
Ramelli
341
342
International
2011
/September
journaloftheClassicalTradition
15. As I triedtoargueinAllegoria,
I (above,n.2),ch.9: Chrysippus'
theorization
oftheofthesort.
ologywouldalreadysuggestsomething
lb. un tnisfragment,
wnicncorresponds
tobuseoiustit b.iy.4-8,
see l. Kamelli,unand Innovation,"
gen and theStoicAllegoricalTradition:
Continuity
Invigilata
Lucernis
28 (2006)195-226,and "Origen,Patristic
and Christian
PlaPhilosophy,
tonism"(above,n. 14),also withwide-ranging
literature.
Thispassage,according
to Eusebius,comesfromBook3 ofPorphyry's
. Pier
workAgainsttheChristians
FrancoBeatrice
identifies
thiswithBook3 ofPorphyry's
exOraculis.
See
Philosophia
his"TheOrientalReligionsand Porphyry's
UniversalWayfortheSoul'sDeliverorientales
dansle monde
ance,"in Lesreligions
, eds. C. Bonnet,V.
grecet romain
D.
Etudes
de
Praet,
Pirenne-Delforge,
philologie,d'archologieet histoireanciennes45,Bruxelles-Rome:
Institut
HistoriqueBelgede Rome,2009,343-368.
Ramelli
343
froma man whom I also met when I was still quite young, who
gained greatrenown and is stillwell known thanksto the writings
he left:Origen, whose fame is widespread among the masters of
these doctrines.He was a disciple of Ammonius', who in our time
had a greatsuccess in philosophy[. . .] His lifewas thatofa Christian
and contravenedthelaws, but in his view oftheexistingrealitiesand
of God his thoughtswere thoseof a Greek,and he turnedtheGreek
ideas into a substratumof the alien myths.He was always close to
Plato, and was conversantwiththewritingsof Numenius, Cronius,
Apollophanes,Longinus,Moderatus,Nicomachus,and themostdistinguishedof the Pythagoreans;he availedhimself
ofthebooksofthe
Stoics Chaeremonand Cornutus,fromwhichhe learnedtheallegorical
method
, whichheapplied, then,to theJewishScripoftheGreekmysteries
tures.
It is interesting
thatPorphyryconsidersOrigen responsibleforthetransfer
of
theallegoricalexegeticalmethodfromtraditional"pagan" mythsto theBible.
He does not mentionClement,nor Philo or otherJewishallegoricalexegetes
of theBible. The same noteworthyomission,at least withrespectto Philo, is
alreadyfoundin Celsus (ap. Orig. CC 4.51,whichwill be discussed below [pp.
347-348]).ConfirmingPorphyry'sinformation,
Jeromealso atteststhatOrigen,drawinginspirationfromClement'shomonymouswork,wrotetenbooks
of Stromateis,
wherehe came up witha remarkablecomparativeaccomplishment:
Hunc imitatusOrgenesdecernscripsitStromateas,Christianorum
et
interse sententiasconparanset omnianostraereligionis
philosophorum
NumenioCornutoque
dogmatade PiatoneetAristotele,
confirmans,
wrote
ten
in
which
he matched
Clement,
Stromateis,
Origen,imitating
theChristianideas withthose of thephilosophers,and confirmed
all
thetruths
ofourfaithby means ofPlato's,Aristotle's,Numenius', and
Cornutus'texts(Hier. Ep. 70.4).
Indeed, Origen shows reminiscencesof allegorical interpretationsof
mythsthatare foundin Cornutusand in theStoicallegoricaltradition,and of
Stoic etymologicalinterpretations.
In CC 1.24 he even mentionstheStoics' etymologicalprinciplesbased on theirconceptionof language as being <J>'josi.17
In Princ.2.8.2-3,forinstance,vpuxnis said to derive fromvpuxos,vjyis
accordingto an old Stoicetymology(SVF 2.222-223).In Origenthereare also al17. See A. van den Hoek,"Etymologizing
in a Christian
Context:
TheTechniques
of
Clementand Origen,"StudiaPhilonica
Annual16 (2004)122-168;relationship
betweenetymology
and linguistic
theoriesin lateantiquity:
M. Amsler,Etymology
andGrammatical
Discourse
inLateAntiquity
andtheEarlyMiddleAges,Amsterdam1989.Origen,likePhilobefore
him(D.T.Runia,"EtJohnBenjamins,
Philadelphia:
ymologyas an AllegoricalTechniquein PhiloofAlexandria,"StudiaPhilonica
Annual16 [2004]101-121),
also interprets
Hebrewnames:R.P.C.Hanson,"InterofHebrewNamesinOrigen,"Vigiliae
Christianae
10 (1956)103-123.
See
pretation
I. Ramelli,"Philosophical
furthermore
in Philoand its
AllegoresisofScripture
ofNyssa,"StudiaPhilonica
Annual20 (2008)55-99.
LegacyinGregory
344
International
2011
/September
Journal
oftheClassicalTradition
ofGreekmythicalfiguresthatrecallthoseoftheStoic
legoricalinterpretations
tradition.18
Besides Cornutusand Chaeremon,Origen also knew Middle Platonicand Neopythagoreanallegorists,such as (accordingto Origen himself,
Porphyryand Jerome)Numenius and theJewPhilo. The former,apparently
withoutbeing eitherJewor Christian,allegorizedtheBible,boththeLXX and
some books of what laterbecame theNew Testament.19
Philo allegorized the
LXX in thelightofPlatonism,20
and his cosmological and allegoricalexegesis
18. Forinstance,
theStoicexegesisofHades as thetenebrous
airthatwrapstheearth,
as developedin Cornutus,
is also
Comp.35,on thebasisofearlierStoictradition,
in
Princ.
4.3.10:
the
dead
descend
to
that
is
this
beHades,
world,
present Origen,
causetheyarejudgeddeserving
ofoccupying
theregionaroundtheearth.ButalHades as thecontiguousregion
readyNumenius,F32 des Places,interpreted
whichwe callourworld.Origenmighthavedrawnthisinterpretation
fromhim
as well.
19. Origenparticularly
esteemedNumenius,whomhe quotesfourtimesin Contra
1.5(= Numen.Fib des Places);4.51(FlOa);5.38(F53);5.57(F29).In fact,it
Celsum,
is Origenwho atteststhatNumenius,"in his desireforlearning,
wantedto examineourScriptures,
inthemas susceptible
ofallegorical
too,andwas interested
and
not
full
odd
of
ideas"
Kai
Ta TipeTepa
<t>iXo|ja0Gs
(ouXrievTa
interpretation,
Kaion^pcivouyypapMaTcov,
eos TTepi
TpoTToXoyou|jvcov
sTaoaiKaiKtvr|0evTa
CC 4.51).Again,Origeninforms
us that"Numenius,
thePythagorean
philosopher,
a manwho expoundedPlatomuchbetter[sc.thanCelsusdid],and studiedthe
doctrines
indepth,inmanypassagesofhisworksquotesMoses'and
Pythagorean
theprophets'
and
ofthem,
for
writings, offers
verylikelyallegorical
interpretations
orin thoseOn numbers
and On place.In the
examplein theworkentitled
Hoopoe,
thirdbookofhisworkOn theGoodhe also citesa storyconcerning
Jesus,without
his
and
it
tov
name,
(Nou
p^viov
TTuGayopeiov,
mentioning
interpretsallegorically"
TTXaTcova
Kai TTepi
tcovTTuBayopeicov
avpa ttoXXg
KpeTTov
SiTiyrjoapevov
tgvouyypaMMCXTcov
axoeKTipevov
Ta
oyMaTcov
TToXXaxo
TTpeoeuoavTa,
Kaitcovttpo<|>titgv
KaiokainSavcosaTaTpoTToXoyovTa,
sv
Mcooecos
cooTrep
tg3KaouMBveo
"Ettotti
Kai evtos TTepi
Kai evtos TTepi
tottou.'Ev
apincov,
tcTpTcoTTepi
Kai TTepi
to 'ItioolOTopiavTiva,to ovopa
Taya0ou ektibtoi
aTOU
o Xycov,
KaiTpoTToXoye
aniv,ibid.).NumeniusinspiredOrigenbothin
theexegetical
and inthetheological
field(see Ramelli,"Origen,Patristic
PhilosoPlatonism"
of
the
Bible
[above,n. 14]).His allegorical
phy,and Christian
reading
parallelshis exegesisofPlato,in which,amongotherthings,he associatedthe
intheOdyssey.
oftheunderworld
Due to
mythofErwithHomer'srepresentation
his allegoricalinterpretation
ofScripture,
OrigenvaluesNumeniusmuchmore
thanCelsus,who,likePorphyry,
didn'tadmitanyallegoricalinterpretation
of
'EKTiBeTai
Kai
Kai
lavvo
Kai
Mcooecos
Trjv
TTepi
Scripture:
'lappoicrropiav,
' aTvmSXXov
KXoou
KaiaXXcov
otimvuvomecx
aTroexoMeSa
fXX'okveKeivfl
"He [sc.Numenius]also citesMoses',Jannes',
andJambres'
and,
EXXtivcov,
story,
eventhoughwe arenotat all exaltedinit,nevertheless
we appreciate
Numenius
morethanCelsusandtheotherGreeks"- "Greeks"amongwhomOrigenintended
to includepeoplelikePorphyry,
who sharplyrejectedtheallegoricalreadingof
Thecontinuation
ofthispassageincludesthefamoussaying:"whatelse
Scripture.
is Plato,ifnotan Atticizing
Moses?"(Eus. PE 11.10.14= Numen.F8 des Places).
Numeniusprobablyinfluenced
betweenPlaOrigen's view oftherelationship
tonismand Moses' "philosophy,"
as Philounderstood
it.Butsee below(pp. 347ofClementas well.
348) fortheinfluence
20. See Ramelli,"Philosophical
ofScripture
etc."(above,n. 17)withdocAllegoresis
umentation.
345
Ramelli
Reis underlined
21. The complexity
ofthe"Gnosticism"
category
by M. Williams,
"GnosticismAn
a DubiousCategory,
Princeton,
Argument
thinking
forDismantling
?, Cambridge,
Press,1996;K. King,WhatIs Gnosticism
NJ:Princeton
University
25 (2003)
Lucernis
Mass.:HarvardUniversity,
2003,withmyreviewin Invigilata
PainA. Di Berardino
331-334;I. Ramelli,"Gnosticismo",
(ed.),NuovoDizionario
newEnglishedie diAntichith
Cristiane
tristico
2007,2.2364-2380,
, Genoa:Marietti,
in
in Cambridge:
tionforthcoming
JamesClarke;Z. Plee,"GnosticLiterature",
und
H. Grgemanns,
M. vonAlbrecht,
R.Hirsch-Luipold,
eds.,Religise
Philosophie
derfrhen
Kaiserzeit
, StudienundTextezu AntikeundChrisphilosophische
Religion
tentum51 = RatioReligionisStudien1,Tbingen:MohrSiebeck,2009,163-198,
H.F. Wei,
ofthe"Gnosticism"
who objectsto a totaldeconstruction
category.
: Einerezeptionsgeschichtliche
undGnosis
Studie
Frhes
Christentum
, Wissenschaftliche
MohrSiebeck,2010,studzumNeuenTestament
225,Tbingen:
Untersuchungen
in"Gnosticism"
and acceptsthiscategory.
oftheNew Testament
ies thereception
and
in theSchoolof
Gnosticism:
I. O. Dundenberg,
Beyond
Myth,Lifestyle, Society
New York:ColumbiaUniversity
Press,2008,buildsupon Williams'
Valentinus,
inparticular
and regardstheterm"Gnostic"as misleading
andKing'sarguments
on whichhe focuses.
forValentinianism,
we
22. Heracleon,a Valentinian,
wrotetheearliestChristian
exegetical
commentary
it
comof
in
his
own
knowof,on theGospelofJohn.Origenpreserves
fragments
was allegorical.Some "Gnostics"
on John;Heracleon's interpretation
mentary
similarto
used etymology,
too,forallegorical
etymology
purposes:an allegorical
in
the
A significant
is
one
thatofdieStoictradition.
Hippol.
Ref.
example
preserved
because he stopped
5.8.22:"The Phrygiansalso called him 'Father'[TTaTras]
themovement
[sTrauoe]
deprivedoforderand measurein whichall thingswere
ofalSome"Gnostics"werealso creators
tossingaboutbeforeitsmanifestation."
legoricalmyths.
evnoppTTco,
23. In CC 5.44Origenalso statesthattheJewish
priests,
soughtandexonOrigenandChrissenseofScripture.
ForPhilo'sinfluence
plainedthesymbolic
derjdisch-hellenistischen
Dergriechische
tianallegorists
see C. Blnnigen,
Ursprung
Frankfurt
a.M.etalibi:
undihreRezeption
inderalexandrinischen
Patristik,
Allegorese
CatA. vandenHoek,"PhiloandOrigen:A Descriptive
PeterLang,1992,228-262;
and
12
Their
Studia
Philonica
Annual
of
44-121,
(2000)
Relationship,"
alogue
etc."(above,n. 17).
ofScripture
Ramelli,"Philosophical
Allegoresis
346
International
2011
/September
Journal
oftheClassicalTradition
a friendof theemperorJulianand
myths.For instance,Secundus Salustius,24
in
influenced
Iamblichus,
TTep'0e>vKai Koopou,On theDeitiesand
strongly
by
theWorld
, claims thattheeventsnarratedin mythsneverhappened at all, but
are symbols of eternaltruths.In 3-4 Salustius, also counteringChristianattacks on pagan myths,insists on the antiquityof mythsand theirdidactic
value: theyteachthatthegods exist(3.3) and, at a deeper and allegoricallevel,
theyrevealtruthswrapped up in storiesthatseem immoral,but are onlyveils
intended forthe exerciseof the exegetes' minds (3.1-3; cf.3.4). These things
never happened, but are allegories of eternal truthsexpressed in "divine
myths"(3.1), since the highest truthscan only be alluded to (3.1; 3.3). The
clearestexpressionis foundin 4.9:
Tauxa 5s EyvEXo
pvouSettoxe,eoti 5e ccei,Kai o mevvous apa navra
op, o 5e Xyos Ta pv TTpcxaxa 5e Ssimpa XyEi.
These thingsdid nothappen at any time,but theyexisteternally,
and
theintellectsees all of themtogetherat thesame time,while thediscourse expressesthem,some first,and some afterward.
Likewise,theemperorJulianin Ad deorumMatrem170-171assertsthatmythoJulogicaleventsneverhappened,but are tobe interpreted
onlyallegorically.25
lian, in line with the Neoplatonic traditionof Porphyry,who in De antro
had interpretedOd. 13.102-112as an allegoryofthesoul's voyage
Nympharum
throughmatterand itsliberation,supportedtheallegoricalexegesis ofmyths
and did not admitof theirhistoricity.
In Or. 7.217C he claims thattheabsurdof
in
declared
Deor.
Matr.
167D and by Salustius De diis4.7) inity myths(also
duces the mind to seek out theirdeeper sense; likewise,in 222C he explains
thatthe irrationality
of mythis an exhortationto go beyond the littera,and
into
its
hidden
and
truesense.
peer
Now, this notion thatthe defectuslitterae
, i.e. the absurdityof the plain
meaningof a text- also known to Philo,Hippolytus,and Irenaeus - is an invitationto go beyond theliterallevel was definitelyshared by Origen.But in
litteraeonly occurs in a few cases, whose specific
Origen's view the defectus
functionis to provide hints to deeper meanings; normally,the literallevel
mustbe maintainedalong with the spiritual,allegoricalmeaning(s). The littera(almost always) relateshistoricalfactsthatreallyhappened at a certain
time,and not mere symbolsof eternaltruths.Justas thebody has its impor-
Ramelli
347
26. RepeatedaccusationsleveledagainstOrigenofdenyingtheresurrection
ofthe
I. Ramelli,"Origen'sExegesisofJeremiah:
See,forinstance,
bodyaregroundless.
Resurrection
Announcedthroughout
theBibleand itsTwofoldConception,"
Au48 (2008)59-78.
gustinianum
27. On whichampledocumentation
is foundinRamelli,
"GiovanniCrisostomo
e Yesetc."(above,n. 24),and eadem,"Origeneallegorista
il
cristiano:
egesiscritturale
trafilosofa
cristiana
e allegoresi
biblica,"Invigilata
dupliceattaccoe la simmetria
Lucernis
31 (2009)141-156.
28. Strom.
5.4.20(on thesymbolical,
and allegorical-enigmatic
tropic-metaphorical,
usage ofhieroglyphics),
parallelto a passageby Porphyry
ap. Eus. HE 6.19.4-8,
seemsto be takenpreciselyfromChaeremon,theauthorof a workon hiero5.4.19).
glyphics(see also Strom.
29. See I. Ramelli,"Muoxrpiov
di ClementeAlessandrino:
negliStromateis
aspettidi
continuit
conla tradizione
Mistero
e reliallegoricagreca,"in II voltodelmistero.
ed. A.M.Mazzanti,CastelBolognese:Itaca
tardoantica,
gionenellacultura
religiosa
Libri,2006,83-120.
348
2011
International
/September
Journal
oftheClassicalTradition
349
Ramelli
350
2011
International
/September
Journal
oftheClassicalTradition
351
Ramelli
352
International
2011
/September
Journal
oftheClassicalTradition
mythsthemselves,since,withastonishingand totallysenselessmadness,theylinktogetherthingsthatare absolutelyand completelyinwithone another.
compatible
47. On thistheorization
Dergriechische
der
(Princ.
4.2.4-6;3.5)see Blnnigen,
Ursprung
-hellenistischen
andEdwards,
(above,n.23),205-265,
jdisch
Allegorese
esp.207-220,
Plato(above,n. 31),123-152.
against
Origen
48. See K.J.Torjesen,
"Body,Soul,and Spiritin Origen'sTheoryofExegesis,"AnglicanTheological
Review67 (1985)17-30;Dawson,Christian
andthe
FiguraiReading
in
(above,n. 31),75,78 and passim;I. Ramelli,"Tricotoma,"
Fashioning
ofIdentity
Milan:Bompiani-Centro
di StudiFilosofici
, dir.V.Melchiorre,
Enciclopedia
Filosfica
di Gallarate,
2006,vol.XII,11772-11776.
Ramelli
353
image
beingmadeof
dust(Comm.inIo. 20.182).Thisdistinction
was alreadyin Philo,Opif.46.134;LA
1.12.31.Origen'sallegoricaltheorization
was strongly
theScripChristological:
ture,divineand Seottveuotos
(Princ.4.1;2.1-2),is considered
byhimas therevelationof Christ-Logos
(1.3.2),who,just as he assumeda humanbody in his
so intheScriptures
is clothedinthewrappingsofthelittera
incarnation,
(CC 6.77;
Horn,
inLev.1.1;Comm.
inMt.Ser.27):Scripture
is theperpetualIncarnation.
This
is strictly
linkedwiththeprinciple
oftheunityofScripture,
derivedfromClement.
orveil,a ocopaTiKOV
Origenspeaksofan Ivupa,a garment
aspectthatcoversthe
354
2011
International
/September
Journal
oftheClassicalTradition
thus,not only among "the Jews" - the spiritualsense escapes the majority,
In Princ.1, praef.8 Origen presentsas a doctrinerecogdue to its difficulty.52
nized by thechurchthat
... perSpiritumDei scripturae
sintetsensumhabeantnoneum
conscriptae
solumqui in manifesto
est, sedetaliumquendatnlatentem
quamplurimos.
et
Formaeenimsunthaecquae descripta
suntsacramentorum
quorundam
divinarum
rerumimagines.De quo totiusecclesiaeuna sententiaest, esse
quidemomnemlegemspiritalem.
Scriptureshave been writtenby means oftheSpiritofGod, and have
as a meaningnot only thatwhich is patent, but also another one,
hidden, which escapes most people. For the thingsthatare written
in them are the formsof certain mysteries,the images of divine
things.In thisrespect,thewhole churchentertainsone and thesame
opinion: thatall theLaw is infactspiritual
and tuttoi,many (those particularlysimSince theBible is fullof aiviy[JCCTa
inthe
or
, oi ttoXXoi)
,
cxTToiJTspoi
simplicioresmostpeople, quamplurimi
ple,
in
the
Old
Testament
God's
literally(rpos Asiv,
terpret
anthropomorphisms
Kara to ptitov,Princ.4.2.1-3).It is interestingto note thatcriticismof anthropomorphismsascribed to deitieswas preciselyone of the main reasons that,
in ancientGreece,firstled to theallegoricalinterpretation
of myths.53
For Origen,themostimportantScripturalsense is undoubtedlythespiritual,reservedto those to whom the Spiritcommunicatesthe meanings "no
longer throughthe letters,but throughliving words" (Princ.4.2.4, with a
meaningfulreminiscenceof Plato's "living speech" in Phaedr.276A).54As resultsfromPrinc.4.3.6ff.,
thespiritualsense itselfseems to be divided intotwo:
derived
Paul and used by Justinand Irenaeus, and allegory,
from
typology,
used by Clement and "Gnosticism." Though Origen in his exegeticalpracdoes
tice does not always offerall threeof these readings,and furthermore
his thenotseem to draw a sharpdistinctionbetweentypologyand allegory,55
52.
53.
54.
55.
is revealing
spiritualsense(Princ.3.6.1;4.1.6;2.8).ThemainokottosofScripture
is toconceal
tothehumansthemysteries
usefulfortheirsalvation;thesecondary
accountsor
thesemysteries
underthatveiloftextseasytoread,suchas historical
at leasta moralteaching.
laws,containing
inEz. 11.1;CC 3.45;4.76:Cf.Clement,
Strom.
6.15.126.In Princ.
Princ.4.2.7;Horn,
4.1.7a thirdreasonis given:tomakeamena possibletoo,so thatfaithcanstand
outbyopposition.
I (above,n. 2),ch.1,withall thereferences.
Ramelli,Allegoria,
andtheFashioning
See Dawson,Christian
(above,n. 31),
ofIdentity
FiguraiReading
76.
His vocabulary
is notso differentiated
betweenthetwo(Origne,
Philocalie,
1-20,
Africanus
deSuzanne,
surlescritures,
surl'Histoire
parN.
parM. Harl,La Lettre
toEdwards,
de Lange,SourcesChrtiennes
302,Paris:Cerf,1983,121).According
n.
the
three
on
and
236,
Christ,
(above,
40),
exeget"Origen
Tropology, Exegesis"
thedistinction
between
icallevelstheorized
byOrigenareactuallyall typological;
withthecontroversy
between
andallegory
aroseonlyintheIVthcentury
typology
on whichsee I. Ramelli,"Giotheexegetical
schoolsofAntiochand Alexandria,
vanniCrisostomo
e l'esegesiscritturale"
(above,n.24)andOlbricht,
"Analogyand
Ramelli
355
orizationof multipleinterpretations
of the text,in which the spiritualmeanof
are
does
not seem to be in line with theStoic
ings Scripture inexhaustible,
method
of
which
involved
a single level of interpretaexegetical
allegoresis,
tionof Greek myths,usually physical allegory.The profoundunityof Scriptureand the multiplicityof interpretations
would seem to be two important
respectsin which Origen's exegesis differsfromtheStoic.
moralislocus: Horn,
(moralisinterpretatio,
Origendrew moralinterpretation
in Gen. 2.6; moralisdoctrinavel ratio:Horn,in Num. 9.7) above all fromPhilo,
who read the sacred textas an allegoryof the troublesof the soul between
good and evil. This "psychological"exegesis had alreadybeen christianized
by Clement. Origen, who uses it much more systematically,considers this
level - the "soul" of Scripture(see above the quotation fromPrinc.4.2.4) usefulforthosewho are makingprogress(;progredientes
), thanksto themoral
that
find
in
can
it.
The
facts
of
the
Old
Testament
cannotbe simteaching
they
of factsof the New; theyratherprefigurespiritualtruths,
ple prfigurations
because an elevation of level (avaycoyi]) has to take place. Old Testament
in Christ:56
thisis in line with the
prophecies,however,had theirfulfillment
typologicalinterpretation
accordingto which factsand charactersin theOld
Testamentare symbolsand prfigurations
of the New Testament.This readingwas alreadyfoundin Paul, as Origennotesin Princ.4.2.6,describingPaul's
exegesis as typological(tuttikcos).57
For all theimportanceof thespirituallevel,and even ofthemorallevel,however,Origen thinksthatthe literal,historicallevel of Scripturemaintainsits
fullvalue in almostall cases, unless oiXoyaor aSuvaxa arise.Indeed, whereas
everyScripturalpassage has a spiritualsense,onlya feware deprived ofliteral
meaning (Princ.4.2.5; 9), because of logical absurdities(ciXoya),paradoxes
or materialimpossibilities(aSuvaxa, Princ.4.3.1-4).Indeed, Ori(TTapcxSoa),
gen insiststhatthereare many more passages in Scripturethatare endowed
inClassicalRhetoric"
cf.F.M.Young,"TheRhetor(above,n.49),381-382;
Allegory
icalSchoolsandTheirInfluence
on Patristic
inTheMaking
Exegesis/'
ofOrthodoxy.
ed. R.Williams,
EssaysinHonorofH.Chadwick,
Cambridge:
Cambridge
University
distinction
inOrigensee also
Press,1989,182-199.
Againstthetypology-allegory
e la sua tradizione
"ReSimonetti,
(above,n. 31),51-70;P.Martens,
Origene
esegeta
theAllegory
Distinction:
TheCase ofOrigen,"Journal
visiting
/Typology
ofEarly
Christian
Studies
16(2008)283-317.
Vision
, BalJ.J.O'KeefeandR.R.Reno,Sanctified
timore:
distinction
JohnsHopkins,2005,chs.4-5,tendto stickto thetraditional
betweentypology
and allegory.
56. Princ.1.3-6.Origenwas inspiredbyHeb 8:5,wheretheHebrewcultis OKiaand
oftheheavenlythings.Theliteralsenseis a
(shadowand indication)
TTEiyMCx
shadowofthespiritualin CC 2.2;Horn,inHier.7.1; 18.2;Comm.inMatth.10.15;
Comm.
inMatth.Ser.52;Horn,
inNum.24.1;Comm.
inIo.6.625.
57. OrigencallsPaul'sexegesesaXXriyopiai;
Paul inGal4:22-31saysthatHagar'sand
Sarah'sstorieswerecxXXriyopouMeva.
Paulhimself
seemstohavetheorized
thealin 2 Cor 3:12-18,wheretheveilon Moses' faceat
legoricalreadingofScripture
Sinaiis considered
as follows:forthosewhoarefixated
on thetextas an endinitself,thetextremainsveiled,butthosewho turnto theLordare enabledto see
thetexttoitstrueaimandmeaning(tXos):forthem,theveilis removed.
through
See Dawson,Christian
andtheFashioning
(above,n. 31),
FiguraiReading
ofIdentity
34-35;188.
356
2011
International
/September
Journal
oftheClassicalTradition
Ramelli
357
358
2011
International
/September
Journal
oftheClassicalTradition
fact,the spiritualsense of Scriptureabsorbs both its soul and its body,without destroyingthem.For thepurpose of theallegoricalreadingis to show the
connectionbetween spiritualand materialrealities,spiritand body, not to
allow thespiritto annihilatethebody.Origen illustratestheinterrelationship
between spiritualand materialbeing and between litteraand allegoricalexegesis in Princ.4.2.9; 3.4.6; Comm.in Matth.10.14-15;15.1,and elsewhere.This
is particularlyevident in Origen's doctrineof the spiritual
interrelationship
senses in Princ.1.1.9 and elsewhere.So, his exegesis ofJohnperfectlyreveals
his deep concern- against Heracleon - forpreservinghistory,includingthe
incarnationof the Logos, and offeringan allegorical exegesis thatis consistentwiththeliteralplane.
WithintheBible,however,thereare narrativesconcerningthe arkhand the
literaland allegorteloswhichescape thiscompositemodel of interpretation,
ical. These essentiallyconsistin theveryfirstsectionsofGenesis,withtheaccountofthecreationoftheworldand ofthehumanbeing,and theApocalypse
ofJohnor Revelation.The literaland historicalmeaningin theseaccountswas
probablythethinnestof all Biblicalbooks in Origen's eyes. In theprologue to
his Commentaryon theSong ofSongs Origenascribesa peculiarstatusto the
firstchaptersof Genesis, those including the creationaccount. He declares
thatthesechaptersmustbe studied only at theend of one's cursusstudiorum,
aftertherestoftheBible,just like theSong ofSongs (theseBiblicalbooks consince theymustcome afterall therestin
stitutewhat he calls theeuxeQcboeig,
one's studyplan). The reason is easy to see: the Genesis account of creation,
just as theSong ofSongs (and we could add Revelation),ought to be entirely
allegorized and cannotabsolutelybe takenliterally.Therefore,theyrequirea
maturestudent.
oftheaccounts
I suspectthatfortheexclusivelyallegoricalinterpretation
of thearkhand the telosOrigen was inspiredby Plato's philosophicalmyths,
whichOrigenexplicitlypraised as theonlyway ofspeaking ofwhat is otherwise impossible to expound. He knew verywell thatPlato could use only a
mythical,not a theoretical,language preciselywhen tacklingthequestion of
thearkh- in his Timaeus,withwhichOrigenwas verywell acquainted60- and
thetelos
, in his eschatologicalmythssuch as thatofEr at theend oftheRepublic
and his otheraccountsof theunderworld,withwhichOrigen was deeply familiaras well.61This is why it is only in a mythical
form,and not in a theoretfrom
sionofeventsafter
Jesus'baptismintheGospelofJohn(1:29-36)is different
few
exof
the
is
one
thatoftheSynoptics
(Comm.inIo. 10.3).Moreover,
Origen
thestoryofthemagicianofEndorin1 Sam28,andprobegeteswhoreadliterally
eunuchsfortheKingdomofHeaven
ablythepraiseofthosewhomakethemselves
(Matt.19:12).
and theMindofGod: TheAtterlire
60. See,e.g.,G.R.Boys-Stones,Time,Creation,
40 (2011)319inAncient
Studies
in
ofa Platonist
Philosophy
Theory Origen/'Oxford
337.
di Nissa Sull'animae la resurrezione,
61. See I. Ramelli,Gregorio
introduzione,
notee apparati,Milan:Bompiani-Catholic
2007,withfour
traduzione,
University,
critical
essays,neweditionofDe animaalso based on theCopticversionpredatofDe AnimaandofIn
andcommentaries
translations
ingeveryGreekmanuscript,
and thereviewsbyP.TzaIllud: TuncetIpseFilius
, appendixesandbibliographies,
Ramelli
359
ical one, thatPlato presentedalso thedoctrineofmetensomatosis,whichOrigen,like Gregoryof Nyssa in De anima, rejectedoutright.That Origen had in
mind Plato's mythsin his own considerationson what must be expressed
mythicallyand allegorically,and thathe reflectedon theepistemologicalstatus of thosemyths,is also proved by CC 4.39,wherehe praises Plato because
he used mythswiththeintentionofconcealingthetruthto "themajority"and
revealingit only Tots siSooi. The latter,"those who know,"clearlyare those
who are able to interpretPlato's mythscorrectly- thatis, allegorically.
After
an
extensive
section
of
Plato's
quoting
Symposium(203BE), containingthe
and
of
Penia
on
to observe thatits exegeteswill eiPoros,
myth
Origen goes
thertakeitliterallyand lampoon it,whichhe hopes Christianswill not do because ofPlato's greatness,or will interpretitallegorically,knowingthatPlato
hid his thoughtbehind a mythin orderto conceal it to the majority,only reof course the
vealing it to those who are capable of allegoricalinterpretation,
philosophers:
to
toutois, 'ecxvpv xr|vKaKOTi0Eiav
"Apa yap oi svxuyxcxvovTss
KsAoou mucovTai,ottep XpioTiavcov aTTEirj,
KaxaysdaovTai to
Kai sv x^r] OioovTaitov tt|ikotovXxcova.'Ev 5s x ev
MIJ0OU
p0ouextern XEyopEva<}>ioo<|>cos
5'jvr]0coiv
EupElv
eetcxovtes
to ouXrmato TTAcxtcovos,
vpovTaiTi'va TporovSeSuvitoi Ta
ijev5i tous ttoXXousev
HEyaXalauTco <|)aiv|jEvaSypaTa Kpvpai
TCOTO[JU0OU
EITTEV
5' COS'eXP^VTO[S E5OIVCCTTO
MU0COV
OXTIMOTI,
TO TTEp'l
r)0EasTOTaTa OUVTaaVTOS
EpGKElV
oXilMa.
Now, thosewho runintothismyth,iftheyimitateCelsus' malignity,
will deride it and will poke funat Plato, so greatas he is. But be this
theconfarfromChristiansiOr else, if theyinvestigate
philosophically
tentsthatare expressedin theformofa myth
and
are
,
therebyable to
findout whatPlatomeant
, they<will see> how he could hide under
the appearance of the myththose doctrineswhich seemed to him
while at thesame time
particularlysublime,because of themajority,
revealingthem,as appropriate,to thosewhoknowhow to ferretout
frommythswhat theauthormeantconcerningthetruth.
It is to be remarkedthat,once again, Origen expresslydeems allegoricalexeexercise,and thathe takesit forgrantedthatsuch an allegesis a philosophical
mustbe applied to Plato's myths.This is theverysame
goricalinterpretation
kind of exegesis, allegorical and philosophical,which he claimed forScriptureas well. What is more,in the immediatecontinuationof the passage at
stake,OrigenovertlyassimilatesPlato's mythofPoros to theGenesis account
of thearkh:
Christianae
62 (2008)515-523;M.J.Edwards,Journal
malikos,Vigiliae
ofEcclesiasticalHistory
60 (2009)764-765;M. Herrerode Huregui,7/m
13 (2008)334-336.On
see Edwards,Origen
Plato(above,n.31);P.Tzamalikos,
Origen'sPlatonism
against
: Philosophy
andEschatology,
toVigiliaeChristianae
Origen
ofHistory
Supplements
diFilosofa
Neoscolastica
100
85,Leiden-Boston:
Brill,2007,withmyreviewinRivista
and
Christian
Platon(2008)453-458;and Ramelli,"Origen,Patristic
Philosophy,
ism"(above,n. 14).Further
fortheidentification
ofOrigentheChrisarguments
tian with Origen the Neoplatonistin I. Ramelli, "Origen the Christian
Middle/Neoplatonist,"
inActaPatrstica
etByzantina.
forthcoming
360
International
2011
/September
Journal
oftheClassicalTradition
Totov 5s tov TTapcx
TTAcxtcovi
5ia tov nap* auTcptou
pu0ov'eeOemtiv
ti
Sokovtcc
is kttov
TrapaTTToiovs'xBiv
TcpTrapaSsacoto sou,
Kai Tr|vsviav tgo eke7o$ei
Kai tov (jtto tx's
TrapajiaXXoMEvr|v,
utto
Evias ETriouEu0|jvov
TTpovtco avpcoTTcp
ettiPouAeuomevco
to ojeos.
I have reportedthismyth,which is foundin Plato,because the garden ofZeus thereinseems to have somethingverysimilarto thegarden/Paradise of God [sc. in the Genesis story],and Penia can be
compared to the serpentfound in the garden/Paradise,and Poros,
thevictimof Penia's plot,can be compared to thehuman being,the
victimof the serpent'splot.
361
Ramelli
362
2011
International
/September
Journal
oftheClassicalTradition
363
Ramelli
364
International
2011
/September
Journal
oftheClassicalTradition
Ramelli
365
366
2011
International
/September
Journal
oftheClassicalTradition
to Plato, all souls will returnto theiroriginalplace, some sooner and others
later,but all of themwill eventuallyreturn:
aniEr UlePlatonicus[...] saeculainfinita
dinumerans,
quibusnocentium
emerde
Tartaris
sero
in
easdem
mae,
permittuntur
poenassaepereuolutae,
, quod est caelum, tandemimpetrata
gereet ad naturaesuae principia
purgationeremeare.Necesseest enimomnemanimamad originissuae
citopostcorsedemreuerti.
Sedquae corpustamquamperegrinae
incolunt,
ut suis
illecebris
uero
ad
uelut
reuertuntur,
corporum
quae
pus
patriam
tanto
ad
illis
uiolentius
ab
sedibusinhaerent,
,
supera
separantur
quanto
seriusreuertuntur.
The famousEr of Plato [...] counts infiniteaeons in which the souls
of sinners,afterreturningmany and many timesto the same punishments,are finallyallowed to emergefromTartarus,and to return
to theprincipleoftheirnature,thatis,heaven, afterattaining,at last,
returnto itsoriginalplace.
purification.For everysoul mustnecessarily
But those souls which inhabit a body as strangersreturnto their
homes, as it were, soon afterabandoning the body, whereas those
whichstickto theallurementsofthebodies as thoughtheyweretheir
permanentabode, themoreviolentlytheyare separated fromthem,
thelatertheyreturnto heaven.
Even thosesouls thathave erredmost of all, aftera verylong permanencein
Tartarus,will return,purified,to theiroriginalcondition.AlthoughPlato admittedofsome exceptions,forsouls who are absolutelyincurable,Macrobius
wanted to presentPlato's thoughtin his own way, and since he believed in
universalapokatastasisor therestorationof all souls, he ascribed thistheory
to Plato as well, so to make it more authoritative.72
Examplescould be provided,too,ofhow OrigencorrectedPlato,notonly
on his eschatological myths,but also on his mythicalaccount of the arkhe,
while at the same timehe consistentlydeployed this mythicalaccount. For
,73as
Origen read the Genesis storyof thearkhein he lightof Plato's Timaeus
the
Middle
and
the
Christian
the
Middle
Platonist,
Platonists,
Philo,
Syrian
had done. Butunlikeall (or almostall) of these,Origenagain corBardaisan,74
rectedPlato on at least one point:he did notadmitofthepre-existenceofmatbetween his Christianthoughtand
ter.He himselfunderlinesthisdifference
inSomeLatePlatonists,
72. See my"TheTheoryofApokatastasis
Paganand ChrisLeeds12-17July
MediaevalCongress,
tian,"lecturedeliveredattheInternational
31 (2006[2011])197-230..
inIllinoisClassicalStudies
2009,forthcoming
und
73. On Origens exegesisof Genesissee Ch. Kckert,Christliche
Kosmologie
beiOrgenes
: DieAuslegung
desSchpfungsberichtes
kaiserzeitliche
, Basilius
Philosophie
kaiserzeitlicher
undGregor
vonNyssavordemHintergrund
Timaeus-Interpretationen,
MohrSiebeck,2009;
StudienundTextezu AntikeundChristentum
56,Tbingen:
und
den
bei
A. Tzvetkova-Glaser,
Rabbinen,
frhen
PentateuchauslegungOrgenes
PeterLang,2010,also
in theContextofAntiquity
7,Frankfurt:
EarlyChristianity
inAnzeiger
withthereviewsbyI. Ramellirespectively
frdieAltertumswissenschaft
2011.
2011and BrunMawrClassicalReview
: A Reassessment
Bardaisan
I. Ramelli,
74. See,alsowithfurther
literature,
ofthe
ofEdessa
AlsointheLightofOrigenandtheOriginal
anda NewInterpretation.
Evidence
FragStudies22,Piscataway:Gorgias,2009.
De India, EasternChristian
ments
from
Ramelli
367
368
2011
International
/September
Journal
oftheClassicalTradition
Origen explicitlyincluded the whole account of the Paradise and the whole
storyofcreationin Genesis among thescripturalpassages deprivedofa literal
meaningand susceptibleonly of an allegoricalinterpretation:
Tis yovvovs'xcovoitostcxi
TipconivKai SsuxspavKai TpnivTipspav
Kai
T6
TTpcoiavx^pi? il^iou yeyovsvai Kai oetivt]sKai
sTTspav
Kai x^P1^ oupavou; Tis 5' outcos
5
oTspcov;Tr|v oiovsi npcoTTiv
cos
oir]0fivai Tpuov avOpcoTiouyEcopyou tov 0eov
TlX0ios
TrapaSEioov8V'ESp KaTa vaTOas, Kai ijovcorjs
TT8(J)UT8UK8vai
cogts5ia tcovocopaTiKcv
8vauTcpTT6Troir|K6vai
opaxov Kai aiorjTv,
o5ovtcov ysuoapsvovto KapTio,to fjvavaAapavEiv, Kai ttocXiv
to no to5e
Tiv Trapato MMaOTlcy0ai
KaXoKa'iTTOvripo
mtsxbiv
to ijXouXa|jav0|i8vov;'Ev 5 Kai 0sos to Seiivovev tc Trapaouk
Ka'i 'ASotputtoto vjXov
SeocoTTEpiTraTElv
Kp'JTTTEG0ai,
XyT]Tai
6i
to
auTa
Tiv
lOTopias,
oipai Siotcxiv
TpoTTiKcs Sokovjotis
TTEpi
Tiv pucrnpia.
Kai oii ocopaTiKcosyyEvri|jvris,
Now, who, ifendowed with intelligence,will believe thata first,a
second,and a thirdday,and an eveningand a dawn, tookplace without sun,moon,and stars?And thattheday thatshould have been the
firsttookplace even withoutsky?Who is so stupid as to believe that
has planted a garden in Eden toward the
God, like a human farmer,
East and put a visible and sense-perceptibletreeof life therein,so
thatone,by eatingitsfruitwithone's bodilyteeth,could acquire life,
and also could participatein good and evil aftermunchingwhat is
takenfromthattree?If,then,God is said to strollin thegarden/Paradise in theevening,and Adam to hide under thetree,I do notthink
truthsin
thatanybodywill doubt thatthesethingsindicatesymbolical
account
an allegoricalway,by means ofwhat lookslikea historical
, and
has
never
happenedcorporeally.
yet
Aftera series of examples taken fromthe whole storyof the creationof the
world and of thehuman being,the last sentenceis particularlyweighty:the
storyofAdam and theParadise has neverhappened "corporeally,"and therealbut itis to be interpreted
forehas neverhappened literallyand historically,
in
truths
that
it
in
that
is,
expressed a
encompasses "mysteries,"
legorically,
of
find
we
for
instance,
Thus,
many examples allegoricalexesymbolicway.
own exegeticalproduction,
in
Paradise
and
the
the
creation
of
Origen's
gesis
fromthementionof "intelligibletrees"(Horn,in Gen.2.4) to thatof "intelligible rivers" and "intelligiblewoody valleys" in Paradise (Sei. in Num. PG
12.581B),up to theetymologyof "Eden" as rjSii,"once upon a time,"to signify
a primevalstate(Fr.in Gen.236; D15 Metzler76).The whole of thefirstHomily
on Genesisbristleswith passages fromthe creationstory- the entirehexameron
, includingtheEden account- ofwhichonlyan allegoricalexplanation
is given.The same claimthatthecreationaccountmustbe allegorizedemerges
even fromHorn.1 in Ps. 36 (p. 60 Prinzivalli),albeiten passant:
ofthelostParadiseis exthatOrigen'sinterpretation
31-32,whobothunderscore
clusivelyallegorical.
desBuches
DieKommentierung
76. Orgenes,
Genesis,
eingel.u. bers,v.KarinMetzler,
2010.
Berlin- New York:De Gruyter,
369
Ramelli
sinedubioin quo
DiciturDeus ab initioplantasseparadisumdeliciarum,
deliciis
frueremur,
spiritalibus
at thebeginning,God is said to have planted a garden/Paradise of
delights,undoubtedlywith the intentionthatin it we mightenjoy
spiritualdelights.
Since Origen attributedthe same epistemologicalstatusboth to Plato's
mythsconcerningthearkhand the telosand to thebiblical mythicalaccounts
on thearkhand the telos, thisis why in thesecases, fortheinitialpartofGenesis and forRevelation,Origenabandoned his generalrule ofmaintainingthe
literal,historicalplane oftheBible along withtheallegorical,just as Plato had
abandoned his theoreticaland dialecticalexpositionin orderto hint,in myths,
at truthsthatcouldn'tpossiblybe expressedin thatotherway.Origenpraised
Plato forhis use of mythsthatpointed to the truthonly forthose who could
which is forhim an exegesis of
grasp it throughan allegoricalinterpretation,
a philosophicalnature.
Epilogue
Allegoryis only forsome, at least in thepresentconditionand in thisworld;
Origen agreed with Clement on this point. Stoic allegoristsdid not put the
same emphasisas Clementand Origendid on thenecessityofhidingthetruth
fromthose who are unworthyof it and /or not yetprepared to receiveit unveiled, and thereforeon the importanceof allegory as a means to hide the
truthfromsome while revealingit to others.However, accordingto the Stoics, only philosophers,and only Stoic philosophers,possessed the key to allegoryand could grasp thephilosophicaltruthexpressedby ancientmythsin
an allegoricalway.
ofmyths,
The importanceoftheprerogativeofthecorrectinterpretation
in
in
all
its
evidence
to
of
the
of
the
thatis,
key allegory,emerged
possession
the dispute between "pagan" and ChristianPlatonists(Middle and Neoplatonists)on what mythswere worthyand susceptibleof allegoricalinterpretation. This was tantamountto asking what mythscontained philosophical
truthsthathad to be unveiled,or unlocked,by means of an allegoricalexegesis. The virulenceof the debate betraysthe crucialityof the question. Most
"pagan" Platonists,apart fromNumenius, denied that Biblical mythshid
philosophical truths;thisis why Porphyryso sharplycriticizedthe foremost
Christianallegorist,Origen,forhaving applied the allegoricalhermeneutics
inheritedfromtheStoicsto a text(Scripture)that,fromhis own pointofview,
was not susceptibleof it.
On the otherhand, Christianallegoristssuch as Clement- who allego- did receivesome alrizedBiblicalbooks or passages in his lostHypotyposeis77
on passagesfromGenesis,Exodus,Psalms,Paul's
he commented
77. In particular,
and theso-calledCatholicepistles.In HE 6.14.1Eusebiusspecifiesthat
letters,
on theLetterofJudeandtheotherCatholicepistles,
Clementcommented
plusthe
are partiallypreLetterofBarnabasand ApocalypseofPeter.The Hypotyposeis
exdoctrines
the"unorthodox"
servedbyPhotius,Bibl.Cod. 109,whohighlights
on
Clement
ofAlexandria
poundedin thatwork(see now P. AshwinSiejkowski,
370
2011
International
/September
Journal
oftheClassicalTradition
toVigiliaeChrisPhotius'
Trial:
TheEvidence
Bibliotheca,
Supplements
from
of'Heresy'
tianae101[Leiden:Brill,2010]),and in a partialLatintranslation,
Adumbrationes,
and othin Cassiodorus,plusfragments
fromEusebius,MaximustheConfessor,
in Egyptin
was discoveredin a monastery
ers.A manuscript
oftheHypotyposeis
- EricOsborn,"Clement
itwas lostagain(see C. Duckworth
1779,butapparently
36 [1985]67-83).ReStudies
ofAlexandria'sHypotyposeis
Journal
ofTheological
Bucur
Brill,
2009])also made
[Leiden:
Pneumatology
(Angelomorphic
cently,
Bogdan
and
extensive
use ofthiswork,as wellas I. Ramelli,"Origen,GreekPhilosophy,
TheinHarvard
theBirthoftheTrinitarian
forthcoming
MeaningofHypostasis,"
Review.
ological
cristiano"
78. See Ramelli,"Origeneallegorista
(above,n. 27).
Ramelli
371
Veryinterestingly,
Origen here indicates the reason why,in his view, Marcionitesand Gnosticswere so deceived: justbecause theydid notread theOld
Testamentallegorically.
Yet,Origenhimself,likePhilo,in turnblamed extremebiblicalallegorists,
who annihilated the literal,historicalplane of Scriptureby exclusively adheringto an allegoricalreading.In thisway,theytransformedall the events
narratedby Scriptureinto myths,which, as "pagan" Neoplatonists mainbut were exclusivelyallegoriesofeternal
tained,neverhappened historically,
truths.Origen,instead,as I have pointedout,drawinginspirationfromPlato's
use ofmyths,distinguishedthebiblicalaccountsofthearkhand thetelosfrom
therestof theBible: only these accounts are susceptibleof an exclusivelyalsince theyare no historicalnarratives- and theyare
legoricalinterpretation,
even comparable,and actuallywere compared by Origen,to Plato's myths, while the restof the Bible maintainsits historicalvalue even ifit has many
spiritualmeanings.