Saturday, July 1, 2023

James R. Royse on Composite Quotations in Philo and Problems Caused by the Lack of Quotation Marks in Antiquity

  

. . . like other ancient writers Philo can indicate that he is making use of an earlier work by using λεγει or a similar word. For example, at Leg. All. 2.9 Philo introduces a (precise) quotation from Gen. 2.19 with λεγει (‘it says’). Such natural usage finds parallels at, e.g., Heb. 1.6 (introducing a quotation from Deut 32.43), or Aristotle, Metaph. 4.5.1010b 12 (referring to Plato, Theaet. 178b-79a).

 

However, a term like λεγει does not necessarily indicate what we would call a direct quotation. It may easily introduce a paraphrase or even a mere allusion, as in the example just cited from Aristotle. Consider Philo’s comment at Op. Mund. 13: εξ δε ημεραις δημιουργηθηναι φησι τον κοσμον (‘He says that in six days the world was created’). There is no reason to suppose that Philo intended here to be quoting exact words from Genesis 1-2, and editors do not enclose any portion of this in quotation marks. In contrast, at Leg. All. 2.9 the words cited from Gen. 2.19 are enclosed in quotation marks. Such devices are appropriate, of course, in modern translations and in the editions of Philo’s works in Greek. But in the Greek of Philo’s time, quotations marks, punctuation marks, accents, and breathings would all have been unknown. And so Philo had no device available by which he could signal the difference between a direct quotation and some other sort of using of a writing.

 

It is thus a delicate issue to decide what (if anything) Philo is intending to quote directly. A good example is found at Agr. 12, where Philo is citing Deut. 20.20. Wendland edits Philo’s words as: ‘λεγι γαρ παν ο ου καρποβρωτον εστιν, κτλ.’.’ (‘For he says, “Every tree whose fruit is not edible . . .”’). However, the LXX reads αλλα ξυλον, ο επιστασαι οτι ου καρποβρωτον εστιν, κτλ.’ (‘but a tree that you know does not produce edible fruit . . .’), and so in the Göttingen LXX cites Philo as reading παν ο for ο επιστασαι οτι. This interprets Philo as having made a very peculiar substitution. However, an alternative Ktaz proposes simply to alter the placement of the quotation marks, and to read: λεγι γαρ παν ο ου καρποωρτον εστιν, κτλ.’ (‘For he says, Every tree “whose fruit is not edible . . .”’). Now Philo is interpreted as omitting επιστασαι οτι. In fact, we can avoid any such problem at all by editing: λεγαι γαρ παν ο ου καρποβρωτον εστιν κτλ.’ (‘For he says, Every tree “whose fruit is not edible . . .”’). Thus Philo is seen to have quoted the LXX precisely, and to have preceded the quotation with his own introductory words.

 

This is not to say, though, that even with the judicious placement of quotation marks Philo can be seen as always quoting the LXX accurately. Rather, he often makes small (or perhaps not so small) changes. For example, Philo adds γενηθητω (‘to be’) to Gen. 9.20 to create a smoother construction. He shifts from ωενηθητω to γενεσθω (two forms of ‘let there be’) at Gen. 1.3 and elsewhere. And many other examples can be found. (James R. Royse, “Composite Quotations in Philo of Alexandria,” in Composite Citations in Antiquity, ed. Sean A. Adams and Seth M. Ehorn, 2 vols. [Library of New Testament Studies 525; London: T&T Clark, 2016], 1:75-77)

 

Blog Archive