Defining genres: an article of faith (notes from my ASOR 2020 paper)

Column 10 of the Demotic novella scholars designate as The Battle for the Prebend [or Benefice] of Amun, from the 2nd century BCE. This novella was published in 1910 but has not been worked on significantly since, aside from the publication of more fragments of the scroll in the 1990’s and a few important, but isolated and small-scale studies.

My paper “Between the Cosmopolitan and the Vernacular: Private Literature in the Post-Iron Age Southeastern Mediterranean” will be live on the ASOR 2020 virtual conference shortly. Here’s the abstract (it ended up being reasonably close to the finished product!). It is part of the session “Interdisciplinary Approaches to Collapse, Resilience, and Resistance in the Ancient Near East.” I was very excited to have my paper accepted to this since I believe the “post-collapse,” post-Iron Age context in which the Egyptian and Judean novellas were written and read was not just a coincidence, but determined their literary form and their purpose.

This paper cuts to the heart of an important part of my dissertation’s raison d’etre. Even before developing my topic, I wanted to study what the social background of a genre of narrative literature was. Too often, I think, we assume that, since narrative and storytelling is universal (witness Barthes’s famous quote), it is too difficult (for ancient literature at least!) to understand it in its full, original context, and to ask the question, Why was this written? Too often, I think, when answering this question, we jump too quickly between immanent issues (themes, tone, “manifest content”) and global explanations based on them. I see this happening in the popular approach to the literature I am studying, under the name of “diaspora novella.” So: we have a set of stories that feature a Judean/Jew who is “successful” (define that!) in a foreign court? These must have been written to encourage Judeans/Jews living in the diaspora! Maybe. It is easy, then, once this jump has been made and an overarching purpose for works of literature is formulated, to define a genre based on this understanding (i.e., “diaspora novella”). This doesn’t seem to me to be a good ground for such a definition.

My working approach in the dissertation…my coping device for wrestling the seemingly intractable problem of recovering the original setting of narrative literature from antiquity…is to divide and conquer and approach the problem of defining a genre of narrative literature from two angles:

  1. The literary approach. What signs are there immanent in the text itself for the original context of the work? How it was performed or read? (length matters; voicing; level of story complexity; “critical mass” of plots, characters, etc. [an idea from Gunkel]) What kinds of situations would be appropriate for reading or hearing it? There are many ways of apprehending these kinds of signs…of drawing out features and interpreting them. One way is narratology. Another is to be attuned to specific types of discourse that are borrowed in or that mimic defined discourse types from other situations (the possibility, and the constraints of this is itself significant for defining a genre!). Ideally, all of this can be put together to reconstruct an audience (profession; competence; interest) and, thus, an author’s strategies in making the text “work.” Besides providing material for reconstructing the context, the storytelling differentia specifica of novellas support the definition of the genre because they are the most recognizable features as storytelling of these works, that is, they give us a sure basis for identification based on the way that the audience would have recognized tokens. A discussion for another post is: how can I recognize novellas before I can define what the genre is?
  2. The historical approach. If the literary approach aims to define the genre of the novella and reconstruct its context based on clues in the text itself, this approach does so from the outside, considering the placement of the novella—as far as the evidence allows—in the literary cultures in which it was embedded. What other kinds of texts were being read and produced at the same time? What did the scribal/scholarly/literary circles in which novellas were read look like? For example, I’ve begun to notice the similarities between novellas (which I associate, at least at this point, with entertainment and recreation) and esoteric literature. How could these two types (this is bigger than genre) of literature coexist? Imagine one person or group possessed copies of a novella as a well as an apocalypse. When would they have read them? Sociolinguistic considerations are also very relevant here (a problem I am having is that, unlike Hebrew/Aramaic/Greek, there is not any significant work done on the sociolinguistics of Demotic). In particular, I have found the approach of Sheldon Pollock to cosmopolitan vs. vernacular literature (which I treat in the ASOR paper) incredibly helpful.

The rationale for this twofold approach as helpful, workable, even trustworthy, is an article of faith: written storytelling literature is not something that has to happen or that springs naturally from communities in the way that oral storytelling does.

In my paper, I talk about the background of the Demotic Egyptian novella, and describe what I am calling its “condition for the possibility.” I wanted to share two extracts here. First, a very brief and, due to constraints of time, un-evidenced definition of the novella (I am talking about the Egyptian novella, but this is relevant for the Judean as well):

Novellas are completely self-contained as works of storytelling and are preserved as such. They contain complex plots and richly characterized figures, and feature layered intertextuality and engagement with traditional textual culture, much of which stems from before the collapse of systems of native rule. In fact, the novellas are a type of historical fiction, nearly all set at some time in the pre-collapse era. In a playful use of exegetical and interpretive forms of speech drawn from the professional spheres of its audience, magico-religious formulae, and even economic terms and concepts used in the Ptolemaic notary, Egyptian novellas do not provide models for professionalization but, often inflected as parody, even satire, presume it. While the general assumption that Egyptian priests and scholars were the authors and audience of Demotic literature fits the internal evidence of the novellas to a tee, a playful stance with regard to cultural themes, themes taken seriously in contemporary genres which are more closely associated with professional priestly and scholarly work, suggests that the novellas were experienced in the context of entertainment and recreation, adjunct and supplemental to what we might call the priestly audience’s “real work.” The mere existence of a popular, widespread genre of pure storytelling in written form with no obvious genre-related purpose beyond the enjoyment of the story itself, of such an erudite nature moreover, indicates, to me, in the terminology of the classicist William Johnson, a distinct “sociocultural system” or “culture of reading” related to, but not identical with, professional spheres of textual production.

Finally, from the end of my paper, I try and put my finger on what changes with written storytelling literature when it is written within a group that identifies itself in differentiation from a cosmopolitan sphere. This is one paragraph flying at about 30,000 feet above the ground from something that needs to be about 50 pages long, so beware!

[T]he possible contexts in which a literary culture can exist change substantially when coexisting with a cosmopolitan society. In the Bronze and Iron Ages, there are examples of literary circles that were adjunct to professional textual cultures, such as at Ugarit and, likely, in Israel. There are also examples from Egypt. Narrative literature in Middle and New Kingdom Egypt may have been enjoyed in similar private, non-professional contexts, but in that case, especially in the New Kingdom, Egyptian literary circles were themselves part of something resembling a cosmopolis: there was no experience of difference at the root. This is not the case with the Demotic novella. Nevertheless, even though the novella was an experience of difference, from all appearances it was not an act of resistance per se, an important fact given the condition for the possibility of this kind of literature was the Ptolemaic state’s affirmation of, and even active hand in, the creation of various overlapping professional circles of Egyptian priest-scholars and -scribes. It is in this context that Egyptian authors wrote novellas that did not encode criticisms or endorsements of the Ptolemaic regime, or hope for a future return of indigenous rule, as some other contemporary kinds of literature did. To be sure, wherever the novella is found, there are parallel developments of esoteric literature, which might be part of the same phenomenon of private literature. The inward-looking, yet non-tendentious perspective of the novella is all the more significant given the rise of universalism throughout the wider Mediterranean and Middle Eastern world, starting already in the Neo-Assyrian period, but becoming fully developed in the Achaemenian and hitting its stride in the Hellenistic, a phenomenon characterized by a high degree of integration of population groups due to increased worldwide movement, including government and trade. This is the horizon in which the Egyptian, as well as the Judean novella developed after the Iron Age.  

September 2020 Update

What has been going on with me in the last year or so, and what’s coming up:

  • Still writing my dissertation. Progress is slow, but life is hard and busy. The dissertation journals fell by the wayside (predictably) early in the process, but I am interested in getting them going again. One reason for this is that I have been using Twitter more to share interesting things I am working on, so if you haven’t lately, check it out. Although beware, I also post dumb stuff there too.
  • Adjuncting at UNC Asheville. I am teaching a class called “The Ancient World” in the Humanities Program. Fortunately I was able to teach fully online this semester. I love teaching this class and love my students. One of the exciting things we are doing this semester is building a class wiki at Wikiversity. Once it is more fleshed out, I’ll share a link.
  • Also at UNC Asheville, I have contributed introductions to the Egyptian Teaching of Amenemope and the Chester Beatty love songs. They are part of a new version of the course reader which is very exciting. Once those are published I’ll share them here.
  • Teaching for the Oriental Institute:
    • Currently giving a 6-week course on Jewish Scripts Throughout History
    • In May-June, gave a 6-week course on Megiddo
  • I’ve given three online lectures for the Oriental Institute this summer. The most recent, “Who Are The Samaritans?” has not been made available on YouTube (there were technical issues), but you can watch the other two. They are:
  • I was set to give my paper “The Interface of Public and Private in Demotic Literature: A Case Study from P. Spiegelberg” to the annual meeting of the American Research Center in Egypt in Toronto last May, but the conference was cancelled and I was not able to get it together enough to present it in the alternate online venue….alas.
  • I read a paper “Genre Matters: Jonah as Novella” at the Southeastern Commission for the Study of Religion annual conference in Athens, GA in February…just two weeks before everything shut down. It was fun driving to Athens and checking out U of Georgia. They also have a Raising Cane’s there.
  • I’m giving several papers this Fall at the online versions of two conferences:
    • For ASOR 2020, for the panel “Interdisciplinary Approaches to Collapse, Resilience, and Resistance in the Ancient Near East,” I’m giving a paper entitled “Between the Cosmopolitan and the Vernacular: Private Literature in the Post-Iron Age Southeastern Mediterranean.” Here’s the abstract.
    • For SBL 2020, I’m giving two papers:
      • For the Egyptology and Ancient Israel open session, I’m giving a paper entitled “When Storytelling Becomes Canonical: Changing Fortunes of the Novella in Hellenistic and Roman Judea and Egypt.” Here’s the abstract.
      • For the joint session of Egyptology and Ancient Israel and Prophetic Texts and their Ancient Contexts, I’m giving an invited paper entitled “Finding God in Nineveh: A Case Study in Judean and Egyptian Prophetic Imagination.” Here’s the abstract. These papers are going to be published in a volume, so keep an eye out for the written/publishable version of the paper here.
    • Clearly I need to break the habit of entitling conference papers “[Catchy phrase]: [More detailed description]”!
  • I never shared the publication of a book review I wrote on Claudia Suhr’s Die altägyptische Ich-Erzählung (2016) for the Review of Biblical Literature. You can find it here. Look out for another review in RBL from me next year on the edited volume Narrative: Geschichte-Mythos-Repäsentation (2019).

On a personal note. We are now living with family on the Outer Banks of North Carolina. We left our previous residence outside of Asheville, NC when the pandemic hit, where we had been living since August 2018, and where I was trying to finish my dissertation while adjuncting at UNC Asheville. Life has changed a lot for us, but me, my partner, and our two girls are grateful to be able to spend so much time together. I have a nice place to work, and am able to support us by teaching online and doing other work. I’m trying to finish writing so I can apply for jobs. Who knows what the future holds for us. Here’s a picture I took from our front porch:


Jonah 1:6 in Harley 5709 (British Library)

Since the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, much less emphasis has been put on variant readings in medieval Masoretic manuscripts of the Hebrew Bible. Most are uninteresting, but occasionally they are intriguing. Here is a page from Harley 5709, a parchment codex from the 14th century inscribed in France and held in the British Library (see catalog entry). it contains the Pentateuch, Haftorah (selections from the Prophets), and the Megilloth. Highlighted below is the word וַיִקרָא in Jonah 1:6, “He cried out to,” which replaces the usual reading וַיִּקְרַב “He approached.” What does it mean? Here, one of the crew members of the ship Jonah boarded for Tarshish comes below during a storm to get Jonah to help. He finds him sleeping: “What are you doing, sleeping? Get up and cry out to your god!” (1:5). While the most reliable versions of Jonah have the crew member simply approaching Jonah and haranguing him, this copy here encourages us to see him having to wake him up! Most would (probably rightly) say this is a scribal error, though it is found in several other copies. For comparison, see the clear ב in stead of א on MurXII, a parchment scroll with the 12 minor prophets found among the Dead Sea Scrolls that can be dated to the 1st century.

jon 1.6 in harley 5709
Jon 1:6 in Harley 5709

jon 1.6 in MurXII
Jon 1:6 in MurXII (from the Dead Sea)

Missing Pages: Two Manuscripts of the Samaritan Torah at the Oriental Institute

triglot closeup
Closeup of a page from a Samaritan Pentateuch manuscript held at the Oriental Institute (Chicago)

At the Oriental Institute in Spring 2018, I discovered an unpublished and, except for a few mentions in publications and in in-house materials, unknown manuscript of the Samaritan Pentateuch/Torah, which turned out to be two missing folios from an important trilingual codex, from Genesis (pictured here). Later that year, I was kindly notified of another manuscript containing three folios of Leviticus. I am currently working on a full edition of these, but in the meantime, have written a short article about them (and about the Samaritans and the Samaritan Torah in general) for the Oriental Institute’s members’ magazine News and Notes. You can read it here. The entire issue can be read here.