“The father of history, Herodotus, related his own resurrection and vanishing act…” -M. David Litwa (p.181-2, How the Gospels Became History).
“They say that Aristeas, who was in birth inferior to none of the citizens, entered into a fuller’s shop in Proconnesos and there died; and the fuller closed his workshop and went away to report the matter to those who were related to the dead man. And when the news had been spread abroad about the city that Aristeas was dead, a man of Kyzicos who had come from the town of Artake entered into controversy with those who said so, and declared that he had met him going towards Kyzicos and had spoken with him: and while he was vehement in dispute, those who were related to the dead man came to the fuller’s shop with the things proper in order to take up the corpse for burial; and when the house was opened, Aristeas was not found there either dead or alive. In the seventh year after this he appeared at Proconnesos and composed those verses which are now called by the Hellenes the Arimaspeia, and having composed them he disappeared the second time.” -Herodotus, History 4:14-15.
“In fact, in our time too some individuals seemed to have actually died, and they were put in tombs, and they came to life again, and some were seen lying on the tombs, some even standing on them. Likewise at the time of the ancient ones they say that Aristeas of Proconnesus, Hermotimus of Clazomenae and Epimenides of Crete came among the livings after death.”
-Proculus*
I sent the following to Richard Miller (author of Resurrection and Reception in Early Christianity): I recently argued that Aristeas was resurrected because of the coalesence of (1) the empty shop in which Aristeas’ corpse goes missing after being lain there, and (2) post-mortem appearances. This is very similar to how apologists argue for the resurrection of christ, only I am arguing more correctly that a *story* of an empty grave and *stories* of post-mortem appearances add up to a *story* of resurrection. I also think Zalmoxis was resurrected, as Herodotus writes people thought he was dead and later saw him and believed this confirmed his doctrine of immortality that would apply to them also (similar to the shared fates of Christ and Christians a la 1 Corinthians). Do you think this right or are there are distinctions here that I have not been aware of?
His response: “I think you are correct to be making those comparisons. Celsus also adduced those two figures (perhaps Abaris as well) in his argument that Jesus was in the same category. With him, however, and Justin and several others in antiquity, I would see resurrection as ancillary to a broader theme or trope, namely, divine translation. The divine physical appearances of Aristeas after his death resulted in his being venerated with a cult shrine. Such was the point of translation legends, that is, to exalt the figure to divine iconic significance. That Jesus came back to life was not terribly significant in the ancient mind—we have catalogs of such tales, none of which implying worship or immortality. The NT authors, rather, worked overtime to signal that Jesus’ return to life was due to his translated state and stature, exhibiting the immortal traits of his divine body in each of the Gospel epilogues. The correct, intended reaction would have been (and was) cultic worship. Such tales of Zalmoxis also signaled worship. So, I see the endings of the Gospels as presenting clusters of translation signals, Jesus’ return to life being but one, but, as with these other worshipped figures, not to be understood in isolation. The cluster of signals, rather, meant divine exaltation and cultus.”
It seems to me that with ‘The divine physical appearances of Aristeas after his death…’ he is acknowledging that Aristeas’ fate does indeed seem to be a physical resurrection. In any case, the end of Aristeas’ ordinary life seems to be followed by some type of post mortem continuation and existence in the sky, and these are the features that have the most importance and are most comparable with Jesus.
* Quoted from Page 171, Daniel Ogden, Magic, Witchcraft, and Ghosts in the Greek and Roman Worlds: A Sourcebook.
