The translation of the Old Testament into Greek may be regarded as the starting-point of

Hellenism. It rendered possible the hope that what in its original form had been confined to the

few, might become accessible to the world at large.1 But much yet remained to be done. If the

religion of the Old Testament had been brought near to the Grecian world of thought, the latter

had still to be brought near to Judaism. Some intermediate stage must be found; some common

ground on which the two might meet; some original kindredness of spirit to which their later

divergences might be carried back, and where they might finally be reconciled. As the first

attempt in this direction - first in order, if not always in time - we mark the so-called Apocryphal

literature, most of which was either written in Greek, or is the product of Hellenising Jews.2 Its

general object was twofold. First, of course, it was apologetic - intended to fill gaps in Jewish

history or thought, but especially to strengthen the Jewish mind against attacks from without, and

generally to extol the dignity of Israel. Thus, more withering sarcasm could scarcely be poured

on heathenism than in the apocryphal story of `Bel and the Dragon,' or in the so-called `Epistle

of Jeremy,' with which the Book of `Baruch' closes. The same strain, only in more lofty tones,

resounds through the Book of the `Wisdom of Solomon,'3 along with the constantly implied

contrast between the righteous, or Israel, and sinners, or the heathen. But the next object was to

show that the deeper and purer thinking of heathenism in its highest philosophy supported - nay,

in some respects, was identical with - the fundamental teaching of the Old Testament. This, of

course, was apologetic of the Old Testament, but it also prepared the way for a reconciliation

with Greek philosophy. We notice this especially in the so-called Fourth Book of Maccabees,

so long erroneously attributed to Josephus,4 and in the `Wisdom of Solomon.' The first

postulate here would be the acknowledgment of truth among the Gentiles, which was the

outcome of Wisdom - and Wisdom was the revelation of God. This seems already implied in so

thoroughly Jewish a book as that of Jesus the Son of Sirach.5 Of course there could be no

alliance with Epicureanism, which was at the opposite pole of the Old Testament. But the

brilliancy of Plato's speculations would charm, while the stern self-abnegation of Stoicism would

prove almost equally attractive. The one would show why they believed, the other why they

lived, as they did. Thus the theology of the Old Testament would find a rational basis in the

ontology of Plato, and its ethics in the moral philosophy of the Stoics. Indeed, this is the very

line of argument which Josephus follows in the conclusion of his treatise against Apion.6 This,

then, was an unassailable position to take: contempt poured on heathenism as such,7 and a

rational philosophical basis for Judaism. They were not deep, only acute thinkers, these

Alexandrians, and the result of their speculations was a curious Eclecticism, in which Platonism

and Stoicism are found, often heterogeneously, side by side. Thus, without further details, it may

be said that the Fourth Book of Maccabees is a Jewish Stoical treatise on the Stoical theme of

`the supremacy of reason,' the proposition, stated at the outset, that `pious reason bears

absolute sway over the passions,' being illustrated by the story of the martyrdom of Eleazar, and