Achilles Tatius and the Christian eucharist.

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Achilles Tatius and the Christian eucharist.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Is there a relationship between Leucippe and Clitophon, the ancient novel by Achilles Tatius, and the Christian eucharistic narratives? Courtney Friesen points out the following passages in his article, "Dionysus as Jesus, The Incongruity of a Love Feast in Achilles Tatius's Leucippe and Clitophon 2.2" (Harvard Theological Review 107, page 222-240):

Achilles Tatius, Leucippe and Clitophon 2.2b-3a: 2b And Dionysus said, "This is [τοῦτό ἐστιν] water of harvest; this is [τοῦτό ἐστιν] blood [αἷμα] of a grape." The god led the herdsman to the vine and, after taking [λαβών] from the clusters and at the same time crushing them and showing the vine [ἅμα καὶ θλίβων καὶ δεικνὺς τὴν ἄμπελον], he said, "This is [τοῦτο... ἐστιν] the water; this [τοῦτο] is the spring." In this way, therefore, wine came to be among humans, so goes the story of the Tyrians. 3a They continue to observe that day as a feast to that god [ἑορτὴν δὲ ἄγουσιν ἐκείνην τὴν ἡμέραν ἐκείνῳ θεῷ].

Mark 14.22-24a: 22 And while they were eating, after taking bread and blessing it, he broke it and gave it to them and said [λαβὼν ἄρτον εὐλογήσας ἔκλασεν καὶ ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς καὶ εἶπεν], "Take, this is [τοῦτό ἐστιν] my body." 23 And, after taking [λαβών] a cup and giving thanks, he gave it to them and they all drank from it. And he said to them, 24a "This is my blood of the covenant, poured out for many."

Friesen summarizes:

Courtney Friesen, "Dionysus as Jesus, The Incongruity of a Love Feast in Achilles Tatius's Leucippe and Clitophon 2.2" (Harvard Theological Review 107), page 226:

The novel shares at least four elements with the New Testament narratives.

1) As in Mark and Matthew, Achilles Tatius has Dionysus repeat the phrase τοῦτό ἐστιν. Dionysus’s words, “this is blood of a grape” (τοῦτ’ ἔστιν αἷμα βότρυος), are nearly identical with Jesus’s words, “this is my blood of the covenant” (τοῦτό ἐστιν τὸ αἷμά μου τῆς διαθήκης).

2) As in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and 1 Corinthians, in Achilles Tatius’s myth too, the wine is associated with blood. First, the herdsman identifies the wine as “sweet blood” (αἷμα γλυκύ; 2.2.4) and the god later modifies this declaration to “blood of a grape” (αἷμα βότρυος; 2.2.5).

3) Dionysus’s actions (λαβὼν ἅμα καὶ θλίβων καὶ δεικνύς; 2.2.6) resemble those of Jesus at the Last Supper (λαβὼν ἄρτον εὐλογήσας ἔκλασεν καὶ ἔδωκεν; Mark 14:22).

4) Both divine benefactions are understood as part of a formal relationship—“a cup of friendship” (κύλικα φιλοτησίαν) in Leuc. Clit. 2.2.4 and a sign of the covenant (“my blood of the covenant” [τὸ αἷμά μου τῆς διαθήκης; Matt and Mark]; “this cup is the new covenant” [τοῦτο τὸ ποτήριον ἡ καινὴ διαθήκη; Luke and 1 Cor]) in the eucharistic narratives—and both result subsequently in ritual commemorations.

These shared elements are too strong to be accidental and certainly could not have gone unnoticed by a reader with knowledge of Christianity.

Leucippe and Clitophon is generally dated to century II. Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 3836 contains part of the text and is estimated to date from sometime in century II:

Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 3836.jpg
Papyrus Oxyrhynchus 3836.jpg (601.6 KiB) Viewed 8777 times

I will not bother to summarize the argument of the article, since it is freely available online. But Friesen concludes:

Courtney Friesen, "Dionysus as Jesus, The Incongruity of a Love Feast in Achilles Tatius's Leucippe and Clitophon 2.2" (Harvard Theological Review 107), page 240:

There is significant evidence that by the late second century, many non-Christians had acquired specific knowledge of eucharistic practices and their associated narrative texts. Furthermore, comparisons of Christianity and Dionysiac religion had become a common feature in the religious discourse of Christians and their critics. Thus, the conflation of the words and actions of Dionysus with those of Jesus in Achilles Tatius’s wine myth would have been readily recognizable as a parody of the Christian Eucharist. Achilles Tatius’s transformation of the Christian source is in keeping with parody elsewhere in his novel and indeed with his larger literary project, which aims at a reappraisal of the ideals of sexual morality in the literary genre of the Greek romance. Whereas many Christians were concerned with creating and maintaining a reputation for sexual chastity, the narrative of Leucippe and Clitophon emphasizes that for Greeks religious celebrations of wine are inherently erotic. An ideal reader of the parody would recognize the incongruity between the eucharistic source and its transformation into an erotic Dionysiac setting and would enjoy the satiric treatment. Consequently, the use of parody in Leucippe and Clitophon’s wine myth illuminates both Achilles Tatius’s literary aims and the relationship between early Christianity and the Greek literary culture of the Second Sophistic.

Such insights into the Christianity of century II from the perspective of outsiders like Pliny, Tacitus, Suetonius, Lucian, Celsus, Marcus Aurelius, and possibly Epictetus can be illuminating. This particular insight, should it be deemed to hold up under scrutiny, was new to me.

Ben.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Achilles Tatius and the Christian eucharist.

Post by Secret Alias »

Me too and it is interesting.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Ethan
Posts: 976
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2018 1:15 pm
Location: England
Contact:

Re: Achilles Tatius and the Christian eucharist.

Post by Ethan »

There is one clue in Leucippe and Clitophonl.
"so goes the story of the Tyrians , they continue to observe that day as a feast to that god"

This is Tyre, in Lebanon and thus the NT and Achilles Tatius are referencing the same culture.
Isaiah 49:26
I will feed them that oppress thee with their own flesh; and they shall be drunken with their own blood, as with sweet wine"

Deuteronomy 32:14
thou didst drink the pure blood of the grape."

Gen 49:11
blood of grapes
αἷμα βότρυος
The word βότρυος [Botruos] as cognates in Hebrew, בָּשָׂר(Basar) " Flesh" , בֵּסֶר(Beser) " sour grapes" and בָּשַׁל(Bashal) "ripened grapes"

αἷμα = דָּם (dialect - דָּ=ἷ )

Gen 40:10 - Ripe grapes
βότρυες σταφυλῆς (LXX) הבשילו אשכלתיה (MT)
Asklutie Basilu = Staphulh Botrue (dialect - כֹּ=φ , ρ=לָ, στ=אש )

בָּשַׁל(Bashal) Grow-ripe, boil, bake, cook and roast
- 2Sa 13:8 - bake the cake
- Gen 40:10 - ripe grapes
- Joel 3:13 - harvest is ripe
- Exodus 12:9 - boiled meat
- Leviticus 8:13 - Boil the flesh... eat it with the bread

The word for meat, feast & bread is the same word in Hebrew, "לֶחֶם" (lechem) "λάγανα"(Lagana) , also known as"אֶפְרָת" (Ephrath) cognate
with βρῶσις (Brwsis) and βρωτόν (Brwton), this is the etymology of Bread , from אוֹר/ בָּעַר [cooked in fire] ἄρτος = אֶרָת]אֶפְרָת].

Fire & Flour is the same word in Greek, πυρός (Puros) אוֹר, בָּעַר , אָפָה .

λαβών is similar too לָבַב (Labab), לְבִיבוֹת (Labibah), κλίβανος (Klibanos) - κλίβανος ἄρτον / λαβὼν ἄρτον (bread-cake?)

Eucharist = Love Feast (eating the flesh & blood of Dionysus)
https://vivliothikiagiasmatos.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/joseph-yahuda-hebrew-is-greek.pdf
andrewcriddle
Posts: 2817
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: Achilles Tatius and the Christian eucharist.

Post by andrewcriddle »

See also Bowersock Fiction as History

Andrew Criddle
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Achilles Tatius and the Christian eucharist.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

andrewcriddle wrote: Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:21 am See also Bowersock Fiction as History
Good one. Thanks.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
User avatar
Jax
Posts: 1443
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2017 6:10 am

Re: Achilles Tatius and the Christian eucharist.

Post by Jax »

Is 1 Corinthians 11:23-26 an interpolation then?
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Achilles Tatius and the Christian eucharist.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Jax wrote: Thu Apr 05, 2018 2:00 pm Is 1 Corinthians 11:23-26 an interpolation then?
I am not sure why Tatius' treatment of the eucharist would imply that (I am hoping you will explain the connection), but I have elsewhere made an argument for 1 Corinthians 11.23-28 being an interpolation into Paul on other grounds: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2650. It is hardly an open-and-shut case, but it is something.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Achilles Tatius and the Christian eucharist.

Post by John2 »

Ben wrote:
I have elsewhere made an argument for 1 Corinthians 11.23-28 being an interpolation into Paul on other grounds: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2650. It is hardly an open-and-shut case, but it is something.
I was wondering about 1 Cor. 11:23-28 too, but if it is an interpolation then to me it would make sense if Mark was influenced by paganism regarding the eucharist (like he arguably was by Homer in other respects, as per MacDonald, which I think you disagree with) if he was a Gentile follower of Peter.

This could explain why the eucharist is different in the Didache. The version there would then presumably be the original one (or at least the Jewish Christian one), and Mark's would be reflective of his hybrid Gentile and Jewish worlds.
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Achilles Tatius and the Christian eucharist.

Post by John2 »

Just to take another look at it, here is Did. 9 regarding the eucharist.
Now concerning the Thanksgiving (Eucharist), thus give thanks. First, concerning the cup: We thank you, our Father, for the holy vine of David Your servant, which You made known to us through Jesus Your Servant; to You be the glory forever. And concerning the broken bread: We thank You, our Father, for the life and knowledge which You made known to us through Jesus Your Servant; to You be the glory forever. Even as this broken bread was scattered over the hills, and was gathered together and became one, so let Your Church be gathered together from the ends of the earth into Your kingdom; for Yours is the glory and the power through Jesus Christ forever. But let no one eat or drink of your Thanksgiving (Eucharist), but they who have been baptized into the name of the Lord; for concerning this also the Lord has said, Give not that which is holy to the dogs.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0714.htm
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Achilles Tatius and the Christian eucharist.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

John2 wrote: Thu Apr 05, 2018 2:46 pm Ben wrote:
I have elsewhere made an argument for 1 Corinthians 11.23-28 being an interpolation into Paul on other grounds: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2650. It is hardly an open-and-shut case, but it is something.
I was wondering about 1 Cor. 11:23-28 too, but if it is an interpolation then to me it would make sense if Mark was influenced by paganism regarding the eucharist (like he arguably was by Homer in other respects, as per MacDonald, which I think you disagree with) if he was a Gentile follower of Peter.

This could explain why the eucharist is different in the Didache. The version there would then presumably be the original one (or at least the Jewish Christian one), and Mark's would be reflective of his hybrid Gentile and Jewish worlds.
I agree that the Didache eucharist is probably more original than anything in the four gospels or 1 Corinthians.

As for finding Homeric influence on Mark, it is not that I am rootedly opposed to the idea in general; I think that all the gospels probably drew from diverse sources, so why can Homer not be one of them? It is just that, whenever something specific gets proposed in that direction, the proposed parallel seems either weak on its own merits or weak compared to other parallels, such as those from the LXX. I have yet to find a case that makes me say, "Ah! There it is. Direct, mimetic influence on Mark."
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Post Reply