Volume 27, Issue 1 - Themenheft: Intertextuality Gastherausgeberin: Uta Heil

This article offers a close reading of a gloss in Codex Ambrosianus B 106 of Origenes’ Hexapla on Psalms , which has in the past only been analyzed for its reference to the Patriarch. This article focuses on the Jewish scholar described in the gloss and analyzes his method of identifying Moses as the author of ten anonymous Psalms in view of Alexandrian scholarship. As Origen could only have communicated with his Jewish contemporary in Greek, the gloss provides unique insights into Hellenistic Judaism in 3d century Caesarea, which turns out to be well connected to Alexandrian methods of scholarship, available in late Antiquity in numerous intellectual centers of the Eastern Mediterranean, including Caesarea and Gadara. Moreover, the article points to conduits of communication between the Jewish Hellenistic scholar and rabbinic literature, where his conclusions resurface.

Studies of the sources and structure of the Octavius have for long concluded that there lays no authorial intention that is not merely rhetorical behind the “mosaistic” mode of composition of Minucius Felix’s apologetic dialogue, its borrowings from Cicero (especially his De natura deorum ) being a mere tribute to the dialogic tradition and its bipartite framework mindlessly reproducing the rhetorical exercise of the controversia ( thesis - antithesis ). The present investigation aims to surpass this “reductionistic approach” by studying not only the structure of the dialogue but also the contents of its exordium (Chapters 2–4) and its epilogus (Chapters 39–40)—all of which betray Minucius Felix’s intentions to present his work as an exhortatio ( ad Christianitatem ) on the model of Cicero’s Hortensius . Moreover, we contend that by assuming for the Octavius the form of a protreptic discourse—with its essentially undogmatic character and curricular dependency upon further dogmatic instruction—, we might open up novel horizons from which making sense of two of the most ingrained interpretative problems hitherto emerged in Minucian studies: the Octavius ’ dogmatic silence, and the apocryphal character of Minucius’ De fato .

The presence of Plato and Platonic philosophy in the late antique Christian novel, the Pseudo-Clementine Homilies , has been underexamined. The present article takes a twofold approach: first, it discusses Platonic references and allusions in the disputes between Appion the grammarian and Clement, a follower of the apostle Peter ( Homiliae Clementinae  4–6), and links them to the rest of the Homilistic narrative. Plato’s dialogues of the Symposium and, in particular, the Phaedrus turn out to be insightful philosophical and literary frameworks by means of which the Homilist reflects on the value of eros , paideia , rhetoric and philosophy, the value of written discourse, and truth. Secondly, this article also compares the Pseudo-Clementine Homilies with (other) novels and narratives from the Second Sophistic that intertextually engage with similar Platonic motifs and passages. My analysis reveals how the Homilist, as a Christian novelist with strong philosophical (and one might say Sophistic) interests, is a remarkable member of the late antique, cultural dialogue, in which the reception of Plato’s dialogues took place.

In analyzing the discussion of fish in Homilia in hexaemeron  7, this article attempts to shed light on the source that Basil of Caesarea used in his exposition of Gen 1:20. It will first critically review the old (but widely accepted) thesis of Jean Levie that Basil’s knowledge of natural history comes solely from an Aristotelian epitome. In rejecting this view, this paper will argue that Basil’s materials, in fact, draw on a more complex tradition than simply being directly extracted from Aristotle’s work. In the second part, four sources that are adduced in relation to Homilia in hexaemeron  7, namely Pliny, Aelian, Oppian, and Plutarch will be examined. By analyzing the similarities and differences between Basil and these sources, I will demonstrate that Oppian’s Halieutica is the most likely source that Basil consulted and used as a framework for composing the examples of fish in Homilia in hexaemeron 7,3–6, despite the apparent similarities among the four sources. I will also propose ways of interpreting the apparent similarities between Basil and the three other sources.

This paper contributes to the reassessment of the role of Lucretius’ De rerum natura and Epicurean philosophy in early Christian writings by conducting a close study of Carmen  23 composed by the poet Paulinus of Nola. While previous scholarship has examined classical influences on Paulinus’ poetry, especially from Vergil, no existing study has attended to Paulinus’ incorporation of Epicurean elements. This paper argues that in Carmen  23 Paulinus incorporates Epicurean doctrines and Lucretius’ poetic imagery to appeal to an audience familiar with Epicurean ideas. Through the creative fusion of Epicurean physics with Christian metaphysics, Paulinus conjures up a poetic world in which the natural and spiritual realms constantly interact. While using Lucretian imagery to direct his audience’s gaze toward the natural world, Paulinus nevertheless reveals a higher reality in which the invisible operation of God’s spirit governs and perfects the mechanism of nature. In thus stretching his poetic imagination to encompass the working of nature and spirit, Paulinus invents a new eclectic literary form and a kind of physiological miracle account that blends naturalism and mysticism. As such, Carmen  23 attests to Paulinus’ literary achievement in repurposing a classic of Epicurean philosophy and Latin poetry for Christian panegyric and hagiography.