{"title":"国王在所罗门智慧中的探索","authors":"Mark Giszczak","doi":"10.1177/09518207211032890","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Historians largely agree that Hellenistic kingship was founded, not primarily on heredity, but on military achievement (MacDonald, 2015). The right to rule was thus militarily meritocratic, but philosophically unsteady, so kings felt the need to propagandize by commissioning writings peri basileias. Diogenes Laertius gives evidence that this type of kingship literature was widely produced in this era, though only fragments of these texts survive. The tracts attributed to Ecphantus, Diotogenes, and Sthenidas, along with the Letter of Aristeas, reveal that Hellenistic kingship was supported by a mythos that viewed obtaining kingship as a kind of moral achievement. The king’s virtues are emphasized as godlike and worthy of imitation by his subjects, as he embodies the law in his person. The Wisdom of Solomon reworks this kingship tradition by “democratizing” kingship (Newman, 2004) to all to call his readers to imitate Solomon’s choice of wisdom over folly. Solomon’s search for and embrace of wisdom (7:7; 8:2) takes the place of militaristic emphases and establishes a universalizable pattern for the moral quest of the individual. Wisdom domesticates a Hellenistic pattern of seeking wisdom and thus achieving kingly rule, which eventually allows one to be a benefactor of others. Wisdom is beneficent (7:23) and, rather than becoming a god, the wise Solomon benefits others with his wise and just rule (Wis 8:10–15; 9:12). Even the wise Israelites become benefactors to others (19:14). Thus, the quest of the king for wisdom follows a familiar outline of the journey of a king from obscurity, to conquest, to rule, to beneficence.","PeriodicalId":14859,"journal":{"name":"Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The quest of the king in the Wisdom of Solomon\",\"authors\":\"Mark Giszczak\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09518207211032890\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Historians largely agree that Hellenistic kingship was founded, not primarily on heredity, but on military achievement (MacDonald, 2015). The right to rule was thus militarily meritocratic, but philosophically unsteady, so kings felt the need to propagandize by commissioning writings peri basileias. Diogenes Laertius gives evidence that this type of kingship literature was widely produced in this era, though only fragments of these texts survive. The tracts attributed to Ecphantus, Diotogenes, and Sthenidas, along with the Letter of Aristeas, reveal that Hellenistic kingship was supported by a mythos that viewed obtaining kingship as a kind of moral achievement. The king’s virtues are emphasized as godlike and worthy of imitation by his subjects, as he embodies the law in his person. The Wisdom of Solomon reworks this kingship tradition by “democratizing” kingship (Newman, 2004) to all to call his readers to imitate Solomon’s choice of wisdom over folly. Solomon’s search for and embrace of wisdom (7:7; 8:2) takes the place of militaristic emphases and establishes a universalizable pattern for the moral quest of the individual. Wisdom domesticates a Hellenistic pattern of seeking wisdom and thus achieving kingly rule, which eventually allows one to be a benefactor of others. Wisdom is beneficent (7:23) and, rather than becoming a god, the wise Solomon benefits others with his wise and just rule (Wis 8:10–15; 9:12). Even the wise Israelites become benefactors to others (19:14). Thus, the quest of the king for wisdom follows a familiar outline of the journey of a king from obscurity, to conquest, to rule, to beneficence.\",\"PeriodicalId\":14859,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09518207211032890\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09518207211032890","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
历史学家基本上同意希腊化王权的建立,主要不是基于遗传,而是基于军事成就(麦克唐纳,2015)。因此,统治权在军事上是精英统治的,但在哲学上是不稳定的,因此国王们觉得有必要通过委托撰写《巴西利亚》来进行宣传。Diogenes Laertius提供了证据,证明这种类型的王权文学在这个时代广泛产生,尽管只有这些文本的片段幸存下来。Ecphantus、Diotogenes和Sthenidas的小册子,以及Aristeas的信件,揭示了希腊化的王权得到了神话的支持,神话将获得王权视为一种道德成就。国王的美德被强调为神圣的,值得臣民效仿,因为他将法律体现在自己的身上。《所罗门的智慧》(The Wisdom of Solomon)通过将王权“民主化”(Newman,2004)来重塑这一王权传统,让所有人都能模仿所罗门对智慧而非愚蠢的选择。所罗门对智慧的探索和拥抱(7:7;8:2)取代了军国主义的重点,为个人的道德追求建立了一种普遍的模式。智慧驯化了一种希腊化的模式,即寻求智慧,从而实现国王统治,最终使自己成为他人的恩人。智慧是有益的(7:23),智慧的所罗门并没有成为神,而是用他智慧和公正的统治造福他人(智慧8:10-15;9:12)。即使是聪明的以色列人也会成为他人的恩人(19:14)。因此,国王对智慧的追求遵循了一个熟悉的国王从默默无闻到征服、统治、再到仁慈的旅程大纲。
Historians largely agree that Hellenistic kingship was founded, not primarily on heredity, but on military achievement (MacDonald, 2015). The right to rule was thus militarily meritocratic, but philosophically unsteady, so kings felt the need to propagandize by commissioning writings peri basileias. Diogenes Laertius gives evidence that this type of kingship literature was widely produced in this era, though only fragments of these texts survive. The tracts attributed to Ecphantus, Diotogenes, and Sthenidas, along with the Letter of Aristeas, reveal that Hellenistic kingship was supported by a mythos that viewed obtaining kingship as a kind of moral achievement. The king’s virtues are emphasized as godlike and worthy of imitation by his subjects, as he embodies the law in his person. The Wisdom of Solomon reworks this kingship tradition by “democratizing” kingship (Newman, 2004) to all to call his readers to imitate Solomon’s choice of wisdom over folly. Solomon’s search for and embrace of wisdom (7:7; 8:2) takes the place of militaristic emphases and establishes a universalizable pattern for the moral quest of the individual. Wisdom domesticates a Hellenistic pattern of seeking wisdom and thus achieving kingly rule, which eventually allows one to be a benefactor of others. Wisdom is beneficent (7:23) and, rather than becoming a god, the wise Solomon benefits others with his wise and just rule (Wis 8:10–15; 9:12). Even the wise Israelites become benefactors to others (19:14). Thus, the quest of the king for wisdom follows a familiar outline of the journey of a king from obscurity, to conquest, to rule, to beneficence.
期刊介绍:
The last twenty years have witnessed some remarkable achievements in the study of early Jewish literature. Given the ever-increasing number and availability of primary sources for these writings, specialists have been producing text-critical, historical, social scientific, and theological studies which, in turn, have fuelled a growing interest among scholars, students, religious leaders, and the wider public. The only English journal of its kind, Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha was founded in 1987 to provide a much-needed forum for scholars to discuss and review most recent developments in this burgeoning field in the academy.