Jill Hicks-Keeton. Arguing with Aseneth: Gentile Access to Israel’s Living God in Jewish Antiquity.
Oxford University Press, 2018.
Jill Hicks-Keeton’s book considers the creation, maintenance, and permeability of the boundaries of inclusion and exclusion in ancient Judaism as evidenced in Greco-Jewish literature from the Hellenistic and early Imperial periods.
Hicks-Keeton (hereafter H-K) argues that Joseph and Aseneth brings to light an otherwise obscure matriarch from Genesis and provides a model for what she terms “gentile inclusion.” Her primary approach is an analysis of the theological function of the title “the Living God,” which, she argues, served as a fundamental marker of the (in)accessibility of the God of Jacob by non-Hebrews/Jews/Israelites. Joseph and Aseneth and related works used the title to frame everything from outright rejection of proselytes (as in Jubilees) to ritual inclusion of them (as in the case of Achior in Judith). By focusing on this label, she uses the heuristic key “Living God,” which is derived from ancient thought, in her exploration of group identity and inclusion. In doing so, H-K successfully avoids anachronistic language of conversion, and speaks rather of “access,” “inclusion,” and “exclusion.” This approach allows for a close reading of the text, divested of modern conceptions of religious affiliation. Throughout the book, she displays her own effective methodological approaches to notoriously slippery texts. Rather than working with one critical edition or another, H-K considers literary elements commonly found in what she refers to as “the oldest versions” of the story. She thus employs the methodological suggestions of Patricia Ahearne-Kroll, using the critical editions of the longer and shorter recensions of Joseph and Aseneth to build her argument. To this end, she includes several charts with Greek and English translations. In this way, H-K balances a complex manuscript tradition, and makes her argument accessible to all regardless of their knowledge of Greek.
H-K’s lucid and frequently entertaining writing style makes her book an enjoyable and accessible read for specialists and advanced graduate students alike. After a clear presentation of the work’s arguments and methods in the introduction, the book opens with a detailed reflection on Joseph and Aseneth, then expands to consider other Second Temple writings. Chapter one, “‘The Living God’ and the Provenance of Joseph and Aseneth” considers the likely provenance of the text as a Hellenistic, Egyptian-Jewish narrative. Because of the theological and social proximity of Jewish and early Christian communities, H-K refrains from positing a Jewish or Christian provenance; instead, she asks whether a Jewish or Gentile authorship is more likely. Based on the positive representation of Jews, their beliefs, and their customs, she concludes that Jewish authorship is the more likely (p. 27). H-K then proceeds to reframe the debate around the geographic origins of the narrative. She considers the various reasons for retelling the Joseph story in a Hellenistic or Roman context—in other words, H-K asks why and how certain authors reuse and reframe this story. Here she employs more easily dated and geographically located texts in order to consider different socio-political reasons for re-reading or re-telling the Joseph story. In doing so, H-K shows that 3rd century BCE-1st century CE Egyptian authors used Joseph’s adventures to explore ethnic or religious boundaries in a way that other (Palestinian) Jewish, and later Christian authors did not.
In the second and third chapters, “Genesis Remix” and “Executing Boundaries,” H-K probes Joseph and Aseneth’s considerable innovations of Genesis creation mythology and Deuteronomic covenantal language, respectively. The central argument of the second chapter is that the narrative’s usage of Genesis creation myths, focusing on the life-giving or creating aspects of God, grants Aseneth access to the Living God, and transforms her into a model for any who might wish to do likewise. H-K argues that this connection to Genesis inscribes the heroine in Israel’s mythic past, making Aseneth a mediator between humans and God.
The third chapter considers the language of “the Living God” in relation to covenant-building at Sinai in Deuteronomy. she shows that the employment of creation language and the terminology of a “Living God” are not merely convenient or conventional motifs, but central elements of the theological message of Joseph and Aseneth, displaying a reverential and innovative engagement with the sacred narrative of the LXX.
Once she has established the nature of the dialogue between Joseph and Aseneth and Genesis and Deuteronomy, H-K branches out into comparisons with (more or less) contemporaneous texts, which occupy the final two chapters of the book: “Narratives of Life, Death, and the ‘Living God’ in Hellenistic Judaism,” and “Whether and How: Gentiles and Israel’s ‘Living God’ in Jubilees, Joseph and Aseneth and Paul’s Letters.” These chapters, compare Joseph and Aseneth to other Greco-Jewish literature, such as Greek Esther, Theodosian and OG Daniel, and 3 Maccabees in chapter four, and Jubilees and Paul’s letters in chapter five. These comparisons illumine how, despite the frequency of the motif of the “Living God,” each work used it for different theological aims. By designating their God as the “Living God,” ancient Jewish thinkers constructed a clear, yet malleable, boundary between themselves and others.
H-K’s research clearly demonstrates the numerous ways in which the versions of Joseph and Aseneth were conversant with ancient Jewish literature—the LXX, as well as later Hellenistic and Roman Imperial texts. This book is thus an excellent addition to discussions of shifting religious allegiances and the permeability of the boundaries of ancient Judaism by “outsiders” or those seeking to become “insiders.” Her reading of this romantic transformation tale is refreshing and insightful, and her conclusions flow easily from her method. Her work is a prime example of how one story, in dialogue or comparison with other contemporary texts, can provide considerable information regarding ancient beliefs. It also demonstrates how fresh perspectives can challenge methods and analytical categories previously used to study the text. H-K’s analysis of how different authors conceived of access to the God of Israel, in addition to the initial question of whether or not it was even possible, is especially insightful and will certainly fuel further research and discussion.
Gillian Glass is a Ph.D. student at the University of British Columbia.