HELLENISM. - Name coined by J. G. Droysen (in his history on the subject, between 1836 and 1877) to designate the entire historical period from the military expeditions of Alexander the Great outside Greece to the moment when the influence of Rome extended definitively over the Hellenic and Hellenized countries. H. refers in particular to the history of Greek civilization on non-Greek territories, the common language that expressed this civilization, the art, thought, and life of the Hellenized nations (Egypt, Asia Minor, Persia, Bactria, India, Syria), from the death of Alexander (323 B.C.) to the battle of Actium (31 B.C.).
I. ORIGINS AND CHARACTER OF HELLENISM
The historical consequences of Alexander's enterprises were so vast and profound as to make an assessment of them very difficult, even a merely summary one; they brought an impetuous wave of Western civilization that overflowed the age-old dikes and penetrated into the midst of utterly different civilizations. The infiltration of Greek culture into the East had certainly begun much earlier; but with Alexander it deepened and extended as far as into Asia. Naturally, the immensely vast spiritual transformation and penetration of H. did not come about either all at once, or everywhere to the same degree and in the same manner.
In Alexandria a new literature developed, of a refined and erudite character, and alongside philosophy there flourished the natural sciences, mathematics, mechanics, astronomy, medicine. Antioch, more in contact with the imposing Assyrian-Babylonian and Iranian civilization, was the second great center of H., certainly less brilliant, but not for that reason less fruitful through its more or less effective influences on the surrounding regions. But culture did not remain confined to the metropolises; it spread into the lesser centers (Ephesus, Caesarea of Cappadocia, etc.), down to the most distant regions, naturally losing its best and most original characteristics to constitute ever more a type of universal culture, common to many classes of people, the expression of an average and human consciousness, rising above boundaries and races.
To the unification of culture corresponds the unification of language. The Greek language, already widely introduced in the past by merchants, spread ever more and began to serve as the international "lingua franca" of the Near East and ended by becoming, as it was in fact called, the "common" language, koinè (XVI-XVII). It is the continuation of Attic, modified however and enlarged, that is, a language intelligible to all, but faded, uniform, which sounded almost the same with very slight local variations in Egypt, in Syria, in official documents and those of the public administrations.
As for philosophy, the new systems that arise in the Hellenistic age, the Stoicism of Zeno and the hedonism of Epicurus, follow the decline of metaphysics to the advantage of ethics. The Academy of Carneades, along the lines of the theory of ideas, defends a probabilistic skepticism. This philosophy of the Hellenistic age channeled itself into Rome with Cicero, Lamezius, Seneca along two currents: radical skepticism (Pyrrhonism) or moderate skepticism.
Giuliano Gennaro
II. HELLENISM AND ITS RELATIONS WITH JUDAISM AND CHRISTIANITY
With the Greek language there spread, especially in the cities and among the educated classes, the elements of Greek philosophy, religion, morality and art. Hellenism, however, was not only active but also passive; that is, it received notable contributions from the civilizations it encountered, especially religious ones (from Eastern cults and mysteries). Thus arose Hellenistic syncretism, called simply H.
Some scholars maintain that early Christianity is the result of a kind of syncretism born of Jewish and Hellenistic elements. It will therefore be useful to know the relations between Hellenism and Judaism, and between Hellenism and Christianity.
1. Hellenism and Judaism
a) The sources. — For the vast period of Hellenism prior to Christ we have relatively few reliable sources concerning Palestine. Among them are the canonical books of the Maccabees, Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus; furthermore the apocrypha (v.) written at this time: Enoch, Testament of the 12 Patriarchs, Psalms of Solomon and, it seems, also codices discovered in 1947 in the Judaean desert (War between the children of darkness and the children of light). Flavius Josephus, Philo of Alexandria, the letter of Pseudo-Aristeas and the rabbinic writings (Mishnah, Talmud) preserve for us details useful for understanding the Jewish reaction to Hellenism.
To know the Hellenistic point of view, the writings of the Greeks and Romans composed in this period are useful, in the passages that concern the Jews. Among them especially: Strabo, Plutarch, Cassius Dio, Cicero, Pliny the Elder and the Younger, Tacitus, Suetonius, Seneca, Lucan, the poets Virgil, Horace, Ovid, the satirists Petronius, Persius Flaccus, Martial, Juvenal.
b) In Palestine. — Hellenism first reached the peripheral cities of Gaza, Ascalon, Dora, Pella, Dion, Philadelphia (the ancient Rabbath Ammon), Gadara, Abila. In Transjordan the Hellenistic Decapolis arose, with an appendage at Scythopolis-Bethshan. Under Antiochus IV Epiphanes Hellenism sought to penetrate violently into the capital itself. The high priests (v. JASON, LYSIMACHUS, MENELAUS) set the worst example. But the mass of the people resisted and held firm against the persecution, rising up with Mattathias and his sons Judas Maccabeus, Jonathan, Simon.
During the period of the Hasmoneans (v.), of Herod the Great (v.) and his successors, Hellenism attempted to penetrate, sometimes favored by the sovereigns and especially by the Sadducees, but the tide was repelled by the mass of the people led by the Pharisees (v.). The Jewish books written in this era show how energetic was the religious and nationalistic reaction of the majority of the Jews, who remained faithful to the religion of their fathers.
c) In the diaspora (v.). — Outside Palestine the Jews were more in contact with Hellenism. They appreciated its language, came to know its philosophical and religious doctrines and suffered their inevitable repercussions; nevertheless, even while speaking and writing in Greek, they remained in substance authentic Jews.
Wisdom, written in Greek by an Alexandrian Jew, reveals to us the attitude of these Jews. Philo too, who had nevertheless accepted some philosophical principles of Hellenism, remained a Jew and sought to defend the Bible by resorting to allegorical exegesis. In Egypt the Jews built a temple at Leontopolis, translated the Bible into Greek (v. SEPTUAGINT) and sought to increase its esteem among the Hellenists by recounting the legend of the 72 interpreters, popularized by Pseudo-Aristeas.
Flavius Josephus too, a Jewish priest transplanted to Rome, even while writing some works in Greek, does not belie his character as an authentic Jew.
In conclusion, it can be said that even in the diaspora Hellenism had only skimmed the surface of Judaism, without deeply affecting its religious substance.
2. Hellenism and Christianity
From the Gospels it emerges that Jesus, although he had gone into the Decapolis and into the Hellenized regions of Tyre, Sidon and Caesarea Philippi, had no doctrinal relations with Hellenistic pagans; indeed he limited his personal mission to the Palestinian Jews. He clearly affirmed that he had learned his doctrine from the Father. When the Greeks (pagans) wished to speak with him they had to interpose the mediation of Philip (Jn 12:20-29).
All the authors of the New Testament (except Matthew, who wrote in Aramaic for the Palestinian Jews) wrote in Greek. Of Hellenism, however, they retained only the common language (koine) and some marginal elements: the substance of the teaching they all repeat from Christ, Son of God, the revealer.
For the sake of the Hellenistic Jews the Apostles instituted the deacons (v.), who have Greek names (Acts 6). St. Peter is the first to open the door of Christianity to an uncircumcised man (Acts 10). Barnabas and Saul at Antioch and in Asia Minor convert the pagans, without making them pass through Judaism. The Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15) solemnly proclaimed that the observance of the Mosaic norms was not necessary for salvation. Thus the field was opened to the entry into the Church of the pagans, raised in Hellenism; but it was not the entry, or the fusion, of Hellenism into Jewish Christianity, but rather the total conversion to the new religion founded by Christ.
St. Paul, apostle of the gentiles, after the vision of Damascus had purified his Judaism, adhering to the Revelations of the Christ who had seized him and to the apostolic tradition. His superficial knowledge of Hellenism served him to smooth the way toward Christ for the pagan world, but it never constituted the substance of his teaching.
St. Paul shows the substantial independence of Christianity from both Judaism and Hellenism, writing to the Corinthians: "The Jews demand signs, the Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to the Jews, folly to the gentiles..." (1 Cor 1:22-24).
A good popular exposition with the essential bibliography on the whole problem is given by L. Allevi, who demonstrates, among other things, that St. Paul takes a clear and decisive position "against all the dangers and attempts at alteration or Hellenization of Christian doctrine" (p. 72).
Regarding the pagan mysteries, on which some would like to make the Christian Sacraments depend, he concludes: "The ancient mystery rites did not at all influence the rise of similar ones among Christians; they could only suggest the name to be given to the new rites, of entirely different origin and nature" (p. 108).
Comparing Christian science with Hellenistic science, he observes: "In Greece thought, from its very emergence, took hold of the direction of life, until then held by religion... with Christianity this basis of life shifts; from intellectualistic it becomes moral" (p. 165).
G. Bardy notes that the "religion of the Savior was not announced to souls entirely empty, nor did it empty those that had the courage to accept it... but it is quite certain that Christianity did not derive from Hellenism, nor did it even derive naturally from the religion of Israel, to which it is connected." St. John, using the term logos, drawn from Hellenism, understands it in a very different sense. Hellenism, by giving the ancient world a common language and spreading the great idea of the unity of the human race, prepared the ways for Christianity, but did not give it the essential. The new religion, having to express itself in Greek with the language of the ancient pagans, Christianized it, impressing new meanings on Greek words and expressions, coining new terms more suited to expressing the new great realities revealed by the Savior.
Bibliography9 works
Pietro De Ambrogni
III. RELIGION
From the religious point of view, however, Hellenization was superficial, and the Greek traditions remained a dead letter for the cosmopolitan populations of the new cities. Foreign gods took Greek names, but their character and nature remained unchanged. Political decline was matched by a different religious orientation. Until then religion had been centered on the city and its institutions; citizens practiced the traditional cults of the phratry, the tribe, and the State. The decline of the cities destroyed the prestige of their tutelary deities, who had been incapable of saving them, and, according to the hymn to Demetrius Poliorcetes, they either had no ears or did not exist or did not care about men.
Nevertheless the ancient cults preserved, at least apparently, the importance and the forms of traditional worship: official acts were placed under the protection of the gods, territories were consecrated to the deity, statues were carved by the best artists, festivals were celebrated with splendor; priests offered the customary sacrifices, numerous writers took an interest in the cults, wrote about festivals, mysteries, cults, oracles, etc. But the ancient gods were invoked more out of habit than out of faith, and the festivals became more occasions for banquets, amusement and license than acts of felt worship. The interest of the writers was historical and antiquarian in character, not religious; it favored the pride of the inhabitants, not their faith. The artists commissioned to carve the statues represented men, not gods. Individualism spread and triumphed: religion became an individual affair, no longer the duty of a good citizen; the object of worship was no longer the ancient civic gods, but those the individual preferred, those readiest to help him, the "savior" gods who were never invoked in vain. Asclepius, the most recent god of the Greek Olympus, became the favorite of the crowds who flocked to his sanctuaries seeking healing and material and moral help; the oracles were consulted for the success of one's own undertakings. People readily had recourse to foreign deities, which were assimilated to their own and fused in one and the same formula and one and the same offering. The name of Zeus was given to so many deities that it almost lost every cultic value and took on the general one of "god." The inscriptions attest that this syncretism was very widespread and that it became ever stronger and more invasive. But it was precisely this that helped to destroy the gods of the city, to push individuals to seek elsewhere.
Restless spirits, tormented, desirous of resting with confidence in the deity or deities, of finding a solution to the problem of the afterlife, were drawn toward the mystery cults (v. MISTERI), which quieted uncertainties and scruples with purification practices, and gave the hope of a blessed immortality and the precise norms for obtaining it. The Eleusinian, Orphic, Samothracian and Andanian mysteries benefited from this desire for a more intense religious life. New mystery religions penetrated from Egypt and Asia Minor: the mysteries of Isis, of Cybele, of Sabazius, etc. Religious associations flourished, which Plato proscribed in his Republic as a source of disorder and superstition, especially those with secret and initiation rites. All this satisfied those seeking comfort for their ills, spiritual and sensory emotions.
The cultured circles, that is, a small minority, sought the answer to the problem of life and of divinity and the peace of the spirit in philosophy. New formulas were proposed, accepted with enthusiasm by followers, modified by disciples, then abandoned for new solutions. With regard to the official religion, the various schools were often more indifferent than opposed. Stoicism, which we know especially through its later representatives, taught a vague pantheism: God is a breath (ἐνεξίδι) that penetrates the universe; the sage enjoys perfect happiness and is a god on earth; but it did not go against popular religion or against the traditions. Epicurus, convinced that human unhappiness derives from fear of the afterlife and of the supernatural, strove to destroy the latter and the former, and to demonstrate that everything is generated by collisions of atoms, that the soul itself, a conglomerate of atoms, dissolves with death; the gods would be beings superior to man, more beautiful, happier, who live in the spaces between the worlds, and who neither harm nor help. Not even the skeptics completely denied the gods: there are no proofs, they said, either affirmative or negative of their existence, therefore the sage follows the religious practices of the society to which he belongs, without pronouncing either in favor of the beliefs of the crowd or against them. Euhemerism could have been more destructive. Euhemerus of Messene taught that the gods of mythology are solely men who lived many centuries earlier, benefactors toward humanity and deified by popular tradition. This facile rationalism may have disposed minds to accept a new cult that was just then beginning to make its way, the deification of contemporaries, especially of the sovereign. Whoever still believed in a divine power recognized its manifestation in a powerful individuality, that of the sovereign; whoever did not believe could see in the cult of the sovereign a repetition of what had happened for Zeus or Dionysus. Nevertheless one must not exaggerate either the influence of Euhemerism or that of any philosophical school. Not even for those who followed one or another of these doctrines did philosophy always replace the ancient beliefs; for the great mass of contemporaries, moreover, it remained a dead letter.
The ancient cult of heroes perhaps contributed to making the new religion of the sovereign accepted. The mysteries too, by attenuating, almost eliminating, the distance between man and divinity, prepared this religious monstrosity, which the ancient gods would have punished. Perhaps it was accepted also because of the growing need for religious novelty, a need proper to ages of restlessness and decadence. Moreover it does not seem that the religion of the sovereign was anything more than a badge of political loyalty, a bond among peoples that left the individual free to accept any religion or even to repudiate them all.
Both among the people and among cultured persons, magic and astrology enjoyed great favor. One must not believe that this is a phenomenon peculiar to Hellenism. In this era there are only a greater diffusion and more numerous proofs. It is characteristic of Hellenism that magic and astrology were almost codified and became a science. Numerous magical recipes have come down to us that claimed to subject the inanimate world, living beings, and the gods themselves to the individual will. The Egyptian papyri preserve for us a vast harvest of invocations, prayers, litanies, magical formulas that call into play, in the most serene and chaotic syncretism, all religions, gods, demons, and biblical patriarchs. Astrology (v.) had a strong influence among the people and among the learned, claiming to read in the stars the will of the gods and human life.
Even the irreligious and indifferent armed themselves against evil and magical influences. Signs and omens hold an important place in the life of the individual; amulets intended to protect against risks and dangers are very widely used; people have recourse to purifications: the portrait of the superstitious man in Theophrastus can, with all its exaggerations, give an idea of private religion, made up of small individual practices sometimes superstitious; people ran after apparitions.
For some, Hellenism marks a religious decadence; for others, it is sincerely and profoundly believing. A clear-cut judgment is difficult, because the sources make known only certain social classes, and even these only in part. The great mass felt the attraction of the divinity and sought in religion a comfort and a guide. All religious unity was lacking; the cities were unable to merge their particular cults into a single religion for the Greek world. Unification would come with Christianity.