<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> 
<?xml-model href="http://epidoc.stoa.org/schema/latest/tei-epidoc.rng" schematypens="http://relaxng.org/ns/structure/1.0"?>
<TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xml:lang="en">
    <teiHeader>
        <fileDesc>
            <titleStmt>
                
                <title xml:lang="grc">Palingenesia</title>
                
            </titleStmt>
            <publicationStmt>
                <publisher><ref target="https://site.unibo.it/lares/">LARES
                    Project</ref></publisher>
                <date when="2023"/>
                <idno type="filename">lexicon_palingenesia</idno>
                <availability>
                    <licence target="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">Creative
                        Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International</licence>
                </availability>
            </publicationStmt>
            <sourceDesc>
                <p>Born digital document.</p>
            </sourceDesc>
        </fileDesc>
        <revisionDesc>
            <listChange>
                <change when="2024-10-18" who="Caterina_Borgatti">encoded in XML</change>
                <change when="2024-03-23" who="Andrea_Mura">written contents</change>
            </listChange>
        </revisionDesc>
    </teiHeader>
    <text>
        <body>
            <div type="edition" xml:lang="en">
                <div type="textpart" n="Morphology">
                    <head>Morphology</head>
                    <p/>
                    <p>The fem. substantive <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign> (<foreign xml:lang="grc">-σίας, -σίᾳ, -σίαν</foreign>, etc.) is a nomen actionis, composed by the adverb <foreign xml:lang="grc">πάλιν</foreign> – perhaps an adverbial acc. from *<foreign xml:lang="grc">πάλις</foreign>, from a hypothetical ø degree of the root *<foreign>kwel</foreign>- > <foreign xml:lang="grc">πελ</foreign>-, whence <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="πέλω">πέλομαι</w></foreign> (cf. Frisk, GEW 468; Chantraine, DELG 853; Neri 2018, 392) – and by -<foreign xml:lang="grc">γενεσία</foreign> (<foreign xml:lang="grc">γένε</foreign>- [*<foreign>gen(h1)</foreign>-] + <foreign xml:lang="grc">-σί-α</foreign> [*-<foreign>ti-ᾰ</foreign>]), i.e. an alternative form of the better-known <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="γένεσις">γένεσις</w></foreign> (-<foreign>έσεως</foreign>, etc.), with the proper termination of adverb + nominal root (cf. on this subject Fraenkel 1912, 60-80 and Dey 1937, 4).</p>
                    <p/>
                </div>
                
                <div type="textpart" n="Etymology">
                    <head>Etymology</head>
                    <p/>
                    <p>The noun <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign> replaces, maybe in the Stoic era yet – at least according to Leisegang (1949, 139) – the older verbal form <foreign xml:lang="grc">πάλιν <w lemma="γίγνομαι">γίγνεσθαι</w></foreign>, already attested in <persName key="Plato">Plato</persName> (<ref type="lit">Phaed. 70d and 72a</ref>, <ref type="lit">Men. 81a-b</ref>), and also recorded in some testimony of <persName key="Pythagoras">Pythagoras</persName> (<ref type="lit">VS 14 A 8a</ref>), passed on by <persName key="Dicaearchus">Dicaearchus</persName> (<ref type="lit">fr. 40 Mir. ap. Porph. VP 19</ref>): <foreign xml:lang="grc">τὰ γενόμενά ποτε πάλιν γίνεται</foreign>.</p>
                    <p> In <persName key="Hesychius">Hesychius</persName>’ <hi rend="italic">Lexicon</hi> (<ref type="lit">π 199 L.-H.</ref>), the following gloss could be read: *<foreign xml:lang="grc">παλιγγενεσία· τὸ ἐκ δευτέρου ἀναγεννηθῆναι</foreign> (<ref type="lit">vg1 A21</ref>), <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἢ ἀνακαινισθῆναι</foreign> (<ref type="lit">vg1</ref>), and the meaning of the compound – which can be understood by the sense of both members – is certainly that of the return (<foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="πάλιν">πάλιν</w></foreign> = ‘back’ or ‘again’) to generation, i.e. to <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="γένεσις">γένεσις</w></foreign>, and it also implies the ‘presocratic’ concept of <foreign xml:lang="grc">κύκλος <w lemma="γένεσις">γενέσεως</w></foreign>, once again attributed to <persName key="Pythagoras">Pythagoras</persName> by <ref type="lit">Diog. Laert. VIII 14</ref> (cf. Zhmud 2012, 232f.).
                    </p>
                   
                    <p/>
                </div>
                
                <div type="textpart" n="Testimonies">
                    <head>Testimonies</head>
                    <p/>
                    
                    <p><ref type="lit"> Plat. <hi rend="italic">Phaed</hi>. 70c-d </ref></p>
                    <quote><foreign xml:lang="grc">παλαιὸς μὲν οὖν ἔστι τις λόγος οὗ μεμνήμεθα, ὡς εἰσὶν ἐνθένδε ἀφικόμεναι ἐκεῖ, καὶ πάλιν γε δεῦρο ἀφικνοῦνται καὶ γίγνονται ἐκ τῶν τεθνεώτων· καὶ εἰ τοῦθ’ οὕτως ἔχει, πάλιν γίγνεσθαι ἐκ τῶν ἀποθανόντων τοὺς ζῶντας, ἄλλο τι ἢ εἶεν ἂν αἱ ψυχαὶ ἡμῶν ἐκεῖ; οὐ γὰρ ἄν που πάλιν ἐγίγνοντο μὴ οὖσαι, καὶ τοῦτο ἱκανὸν τεκμήριον τοῦ ταῦτ’ εἶναι, εἰ τῷ ὄντι φανερὸν γίγνοιτο ὅτι οὐδαμόθεν ἄλλοθεν γίγνονται οἱ ζῶντες ἢ ἐκ τῶν τεθνεώτων,</foreign><ref type="lit">72a</ref><foreign xml:lang="grc">ὁμολογεῖται ἄρα ἡμῖν καὶ ταύτῃ τοὺς ζῶντας ἐκ τῶν τεθνεώτων γεγονέναι οὐδὲν ἧττον ἢ τοὺς τεθνεῶτας ἐκ τῶν ζώντων, τούτου δὲ ὄντος ἱκανόν που ἐδόκει τεκμήριον εἶναι ὅτι ἀναγκαῖον τὰς τῶν τεθνεώτων ψυχὰς εἶναί που, ὅθεν δὴ πάλιν γίγνεσθαι.</foreign></quote>
                    <p/>
                    
                    
                    <p><ref type="lit"><hi rend="italic">Men</hi>. 81a-b </ref></p>
                    <quote><foreign xml:lang="grc">οἱ μὲν λέγοντές εἰσι τῶν ἱερέων τε καὶ τῶν ἱερειῶν ὅσοις μεμέληκε περὶ ὧν μεταχειρίζονται λόγον οἵοις τ’ εἶναι διδόναι· λέγει δὲ καὶ Πίνδαρος καὶ ἄλλοι πολλοὶ τῶν ποιητῶν ὅσοι θεῖοί εἰσιν. ἃ δὲ λέγουσιν, ταυτί ἐστιν· ἀλλὰ σκόπει εἴ σοι δοκοῦσιν ἀληθῆ λέγειν. φασὶ γὰρ τὴν ψυχὴν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου εἶναι ἀθάνατον, καὶ τοτὲ μὲν τελευτᾶν – ὃ δὴ ἀποθνῄσκειν καλοῦσι – τοτὲ δὲ πάλιν γίγνεσθαι, ἀπόλλυσθαι δ’ οὐδέποτε· δεῖν δὴ διὰ ταῦτα ὡς ὁσιώτατα διαβιῶναι τὸν βίον.</foreign></quote>
                    <p/>
                    
                    <p></p>
                    
                    <p><ref type="lit">Philo <hi rend="italic">VM</hi> II 65 </ref></p>
                    <quote><foreign xml:lang="grc">ταῦτα τῶν ἀγαθῶν ἀνδρῶν ἐστιν ἀριστεῖα καὶ ἆθλα, δι’ ὧν οὐ μόνον αὐτοὶ καὶ γένη σωτηρίας ἔτυχον τοὺς μεγίστους κινδύνους ἐκφυγόντες, οἳ κατὰ τὸν τῶν στοιχείων νεωτερισμὸν τοῖς πανταχοῦ πᾶσιν ἐπετειχίσθησαν, ἀλλὰ καὶ παλιγγενεσίας ἐγένοντο ἡγεμόνες καὶ δευτέρας ἀρχηγέται περιόδου,</foreign></quote>
                    <p/>
                    
                    
                   
                    
                    <p><ref type="lit"><hi rend="italic">Aet</hi>. 10,76 </ref></p>
                    <quote><foreign xml:lang="grc">Βόηθος γοῦν ὁ Σιδώνιος (<ref type="lit">SVF III 7</ref>) καὶ Παναίτιος, ἄνδρες ἐν τοῖς Στωϊκοῖς δόγμασιν ἰσχυκότες, ἅτε θεόληπτοι, τὰς ἐκπυρώσεις καὶ παλιγγενεσίας καταλιπόντες πρὸς ὁσιώτερον δόγμα τὸ τῆς ἀφθαρσίας τοῦ κόσμου πάντως ηὐτομόλησαν, <ref type="lit">14,47 (= Chrysipp. SVF II 613</ref>) καὶ μὴν οἵ γε τὰς ἐκπυρώσεις καὶ τὰς παλιγγενεσίας εἰσηγούμενοι τοῦ κόσμου νομίζουσι καὶ ὁμολογοῦσι τοὺς ἀστέρας θεοὺς εἶναι, οὓς τῷ λόγῳ διαφθείρειν οὐκ ἐρυθριῶσιν,</foreign></quote>
                    <p/>
                    
                    <p><ref type="lit"><hi rend="italic">Leg</hi>. ad G. 325 </ref></p>
                    <quote><foreign xml:lang="grc">τὸν ἐπικρεμάμενον ἀεὶ τοῦ θανάτου φόβον ἀπώσω καὶ τεθνεῶτα τῷ δέει ζωπυρήσας καθάπερ ἐκ παλιγγενεσίας ἀνήγειρας,</foreign></quote>
                    <p/>
                    
                    <p><ref type="lit"><hi rend="italic">Post. Caini</hi> 124 </ref></p>
                    <quote><foreign xml:lang="grc">περὶ μὲν οὖν τῶν Λάμεχ γυναικῶν τε καὶ ἐκγόνων ἱκανῶς οἶμαι δεδηλῶσθαι· τὴν δ’ ὥσπερ παλιγγενεσίαν Ἄβελ τοῦ δολοφονηθέντος σκεψώμεθα. ἔγνω φησίν Ἀδὰμ τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ Εὔαν, καὶ συλλαβοῦσα ἔτεκεν υἱόν, καὶ ἐπωνόμασε τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Σὴθ ‹λέγουσα› (add. Cohn-Wendl. ex LXX)· ἐξανέστησε γάρ μοι ὁ θεὸς σπέρμα ἕτερον ἀντὶ Ἄβελ, ὃν ἀπέκτεινε Κάιν,</foreign></quote>
                    <p/>
                    
                    <p><ref type="lit"><hi rend="italic">De Cherub</hi>. 114s.</ref></p>
                    <quote><foreign xml:lang="grc">ποῦ γάρ μου τὸ σῶμα πρὸ γενέσεως ἦν; ποῖ δὲ καὶ χωρήσει μεταστάντος ‹μου› (add. Cohn-Wendl.); ποῦ δὲ καὶ τοῦ δοκοῦντος ὑφεστάναι τῶν ἡλικιῶν αἱ διαφοραί; ποῦ τὸ βρέφος, ποῦ ὁ παῖς, ποῦ ‹ὁ› (ins. Richter, quod recc. Cohn-Wendl.) ἀντίπαις, ποῦ ὁ ἄρτι ἡβῶν, ποῦ τὸ μειράκιον, ὁ πρωτογένειος, ὁ νεανίας, ὁ τέλειος ἀνήρ; πόθεν δὲ ἦλθεν ἡ ψυχή, ποῖ δὲ χωρήσει, πόσον δὲ χρόνον ἡμῖν ὁμοδίαιτος ἔσται; τίς δέ ἐστι τὴν οὐσίαν, ἔχομεν εἰπεῖν; πότε δὲ καὶ ἐκτησάμεθα αὐτήν; πρὸ γενέσεως; ἀλλ’ οὐχ ὑπήρχομεν· μετὰ τὸν θάνατον; ἀλλ’ οὐκ ἐσόμεθα οἱ μετὰ σωμάτων σύγκριτοι ποιοί, ἀλλ’ εἰς παλιγγενεσίαν ὁρμήσομεν οἱ μετὰ ἀσωμάτων σύγκριτοι ποιοί.</foreign></quote>
                    <p/>
                    
                    <p><ref type="lit">Plut. Esu carn. I 996c </ref></p>
                    <quote><foreign xml:lang="grc">καίτοι δοκεῖ παλαιότερος οὗτος ὁ λόγος εἶναι· τὰ γὰρ δὴ περὶ τὸν Διόνυσον μεμυθευμένα πάθη τοῦ διαμελισμοῦ καὶ τὰ Τιτάνων ἐπ’ αὐτὸν τολμήματα γευσαμένων τε τοῦ φόνου κολάσεις [τε τούτων] καὶ κεραυνώσεις, ᾐνιγμένος ἐστὶ μῦθος εἰς τὴν παλιγγενεσίαν· τὸ γὰρ ἐν ἡμῖν ἄλογον καὶ ἄτακτον καὶ βίαιον οὐ θεῖον ἀλλὰ δαιμονικὸν οἱ παλαιοὶ Τιτᾶνας ὠνόμασαν, [καὶ] τοῦτ’ ἔστι κολαζομένους καὶ δίκην τίνοντας, <ref type="lit">II 998c</ref> ἀλλ’ ἐὰν μὴ προσαποδείξῃ τις, ὅτι χρῶνται κοινοῖς αἱ ψυχαὶ σώμασιν ἐν ταῖς παλιγγενεσίαις καὶ τὸ νῦν λογικὸν αὖθις γίγνεται ἄλογον καὶ πάλιν ἥμερον τὸ νῦν ἄγριον, ἀλλάσσει δ’ ἡ φύσις ἅπαντα καὶ μετοικίζει “σαρκῶν ἀλλογνῶτι περιστέλλουσα χιτῶνι” (<ref type="lit">Emped. VS 31 B 126</ref>), ταῦτ’ οὐκ ἀποτρέψει τὸ ἀνήμερον, τὸ ἀκόλαστον, τὸ καὶ σώματι νόσους καὶ βαρύτητας ἐμποιοῦν καὶ ψυχὴν ἐπὶ πόλεμον ἀνομώτερον τρεπομένην διαφθεῖρον, ὅταν ἐθισθῶμεν [μὴ] αἵματος ἄνευ καὶ φόνου μὴ ξένον ἑστιᾶν, μὴ γάμον ἑορτάζειν, μὴ φίλοις συγγίγνεσθαι,</foreign></quote>
                    <p/>
                    
                    <p><ref type="lit"><hi rend="italic">Is</hi>. 364f </ref></p>
                    <quote><foreign xml:lang="grc">Ἀργείοις δὲ βουγενὴς Διόνυσος ἐπίκλην ἐστίν· ἀνακαλοῦνται δ’ αὐτὸν ὑπὸ σαλπίγγων ἐξ ὕδατος ἐμβάλλοντες εἰς τὴν ἄβυσσον ἄρνα τῷ Πυλαόχῳ· τὰς δὲ σάλπιγγας ἐν θύρσοις ἀποκρύπτουσιν, ὡς Σωκράτης ἐν τοῖς περὶ ὁσίων (fr. 5 M.) εἴρηκεν. ὁμολογεῖ δὲ καὶ τὰ Τιτανικὰ καὶ Νυκτέλια τοῖς λεγομένοις Ὀσίριδος διασπασμοῖς καὶ ταῖς ἀναβιώσεσι καὶ παλιγγενεσίαις· ὁμοίως δὲ καὶ τὰ περὶ τὰς ταφάς, <ref type="lit">379e-f</ref> ᾗ καὶ περὶ τούτων τὰ εἰκότα διελθεῖν οὐκ ἀνάρμοστόν ἐστι· τὸ μὲν γὰρ εἰς ταῦτα τὰ ζῷα τοὺς θεοὺς τὸν Τυφῶνα δείσαντας μεταβαλεῖν, οἷον ἀποκρύπτοντας ἑαυτοὺς σώμασιν ἴβεων καὶ κυνῶν καὶ ἱεράκων, πᾶσαν ὑπερπέπαικε τερατείαν καὶ μυθολογίαν, καὶ τὸ ταῖς ψυχαῖς τῶν θανόντων ὅσαι διαμένουσιν εἰς ταῦτα μόνα γίνεσθαι τὴν παλιγγενεσίαν ὁμοίως ἄπιστον.</foreign></quote>
                    <p/>
                    
                    <p><ref type="lit">NT <hi rend="italic">Mt</hi>. 19,28 </ref></p>
                    <quote><foreign xml:lang="grc">ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς· Ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι ὑμεῖς οἱ ἀκολουθήσαντές μοι ἐν τῇ παλιγγενεσίᾳ, ὅταν καθίσῃ ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐπὶ θρόνου δόξης αὐτοῦ, καθήσεσθε καὶ ὑμεῖς ἐπὶ δώδεκα θρόνους κρίνοντες τὰς δώδεκα φυλὰς τοῦ Ἰσραήλ,</foreign></quote>
                    <p/>
                    
                    <p><ref type="lit"><hi rend="italic">Tt</hi>. 3,4-7 </ref></p>
                    <quote><foreign xml:lang="grc">ὅτε δὲ ἡ χρηστότης καὶ ἡ φιλανθρωπία ἐπεφάνη τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν θεοῦ, οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων τῶν ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ ἃ ἐποιήσαμεν ἡμεῖς ἀλλὰ κατὰ τὸ αὐτοῦ ἔλεος ἔσωσεν ἡμᾶς διὰ λουτροῦ παλιγγενεσίας καὶ ἀνακαινώσεως πνεύματος ἁγίου, οὗ ἐξέχεεν ἐφ’ ἡμᾶς πλουσίως διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν, ἵνα δικαιωθέντες τῇ ἐκείνου χάριτι κληρονόμοι γενηθῶμεν κατ’ ἐλπίδα ζωῆς αἰωνίου.</foreign></quote>
                    <p/>
                    
                    <p><ref type="lit">Marc. Aur. XI 1,2-3 </ref></p>
                    <quote><foreign xml:lang="grc">ἔτι δὲ περιέρχεται τὸν ὅλον κόσμον καὶ τὸ περὶ αὐτὸν κενὸν καὶ τὸ σχῆμα αὐτοῦ καὶ εἰς τὴν ἀπειρίαν τοῦ αἰῶνος ἐκτείνεται καὶ τὴν περιοδικὴν παλιγγενεσίαν τῶν ὅλων ἐμπεριλαμβάνει καὶ περινοεῖ καὶ θεωρεῖ ὅτι οὐδὲν νεώτερον ὄψονται οἱ μεθ’ ἡμᾶς οὐδὲ περιττότερον εἶδον οἱ πρὸ ἡμῶν, ἀλλὰ τρόπον τινὰ ὁ τεσσαρακοντούτης, ἐὰν νοῦν ὁποσονοῦν ἔχῃ, πάντα τὰ γεγονότα καὶ τὰ ἐσόμενα ἑώρακε κατὰ τὸ ὁμοειδές.</foreign></quote>
                    <p/>    
                    
                    <p><ref type="lit">Alex. Aphr. In <hi rend="italic">Arist. APr</hi>. p. 180,31-36  W.</ref></p>
                    <quote><foreign xml:lang="grc">ἀληθὲς δὲ δύναταί ποτε γενέσθαι κατ’ αὐτοὺς μετὰ τὸν θάνατον τὸν Δίωνος τό “τούτου κεχώρισται ἡ ψυχὴ καὶ τὸ σώμα” δεικνυμένου Δίωνος· ἀρέσκει γὰρ αὐτοῖς τὸ μετὰ τὴν ἐκπύρωσιν πάλιν πάντα ταὐτὰ ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ γίνεσθαι κατ’ ἀριθμόν, ὡς καὶ τὸν ἰδίως ποιὸν πάλιν τὸν αὐτὸν τῷ πρόσθεν εἶναί τε καὶ γίνεσθαι ἐν ἐκείνῳ τῷ κόσμῳ, ὡς ἐν τοῖς περὶ κόσμου Χρύσιππος (<ref type="lit"><hi rend="italic">SVF</hi> II 624</ref>) λέγει.</foreign></quote>
                    <p/>    
                    
                    <p><ref type="lit">Porph. <hi rend="italic">VP</hi> 19 (ap. Dicaearch. fr. 41 Mir. = Pyth. <hi rend="italic">VS</hi> 14 A 8a) </ref></p>
                    <quote><foreign xml:lang="grc">ἃ μὲν οὖν ἔλεγε τοῖς συνοῦσιν οὐδὲ εἷς ἔχει φράσαι βεβαίως· καὶ γὰρ οὐχ ἡ τυχοῦσα ἦν παρ’ αὐτοῖς σιωπή. μάλιστα μέντοι γνώριμα παρὰ πᾶσιν ἐγένετο πρῶτον μὲν ὡς ἀθάνατον εἶναι φησὶ τὴν ψυχήν, εἶτα μεταβάλλουσαν εἰς ἄλλα γένη ζῴων, πρὸς δὲ τούτοις ὅτι κατὰ περιόδους τινὰς τὰ γενόμενά ποτε πάλιν γίνεται, νέον δ’ οὐδὲν ἁπλῶς ἔστι, καὶ ὅτι πάντα τὰ γινόμενα ἔμψυχα ὁμογενῆ δεῖ νομίζειν. φέρεται γὰρ εἰς τὴν Ἑλλάδα τὰ δόγματα πρῶτος κομίσαι ταῦτα Πυθαγόρας.</foreign></quote>
                    <p/>    
                    
                    <p><ref type="lit">Serv. <hi rend="italic">ad</hi> Verg. <hi rend="italic">Aen</hi>. 3,68 </ref></p>
                    <quote><foreign xml:lang="lat">Pythagoras vero non</foreign> <foreign xml:lang="grc">μετεμψύχωσιν</foreign>, <foreign xml:lang="lat">sed</foreign> <foreign xml:lang="grc">παλιγγενεσίαν</foreign> <foreign xml:lang="lat">esse dicit, hoc est redire, sed post tempus</foreign>.</quote>
                    <p/>    
                    
                    <p><ref type="lit">Nem. <hi rend="italic">Nat. hom</hi>. 2 p. 116,3s. Matth. </ref></p>
                    <quote><foreign xml:lang="grc">Κρόνιος (fr. 12 Leem.) μὲν γὰρ ἐν τῷ περὶ παλιγγενεσίας (οὕτω δὲ καλεῖ τὴν μετενσωμάτωσιν) λογικὰς πάσας εἶναι βούλεται, ὁμοίως δὲ καὶ Θεόδωρος ὁ Πλατωνικὸς ἐν τῷ ὅτι ἡ ψυχὴ πάντα τὰ εἴδη ἐστί, καὶ Πορφύριος ὁμοίως· Ἰάμβλιχος δὲ τὴν ἐναντίαν τούτοις δραμὼν κατ’ εἶδος ζῴων ψυχῆς εἶδος εἶναι λέγει, ἤγουν εἴδη διάφορα.</foreign></quote>
                    <p/>    
                    
                    <p><ref type="lit">Simpl. <hi rend="italic">In Arist. Ph</hi>. p. 886,11 D. (= Chrysipp. SVF II 627) </ref></p>
                    <quote><foreign xml:lang="grc">τοῦτο δὲ τὸ ζήτημα τῇ τῶν Στωικῶν ἐστι μᾶλλον ἁρμόττον παλιγγενεσίᾳ· λέγοντες γὰρ ἐκεῖνοι τὸν αὐτὸν ἐμὲ πάλιν γίνεσθαι ἐν τῇ παλιγγενεσίᾳ, ζητοῦσιν εἰκότως πότερον εἷς εἰμι τῷ ἀριθμῷ ὁ νῦν καὶ τότε, διὰ τὸ τῇ οὐσίᾳ εἶναι ὁ αὐτός, ἢ τῇ κατατάξει τῇ εἰς ἄλλην καὶ ἄλλην κοσμοποιΐαν διαφοροῦμαι.</foreign></quote>
                    <p/>    
                    
                    <p><ref type="lit"><hi rend="italic">schol</hi>. Soph. <hi rend="italic">El</hi>. 62 p. 118 X. (= Suda η 88 A.) </ref></p>
                    <quote><foreign xml:lang="grc">Πυθαγόρας καθείρξας ἑαυτὸν ἐν ὑπογείῳ λογοποιεῖν ἐκέλευσε τὴν μητέρα ὡς ἄρα τεθνηκὼς ἔοι. καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα ἐπιφανεὶς περὶ παλιγγενεσίας καὶ τῶν καθ’ ᾍδου τινὰ ἐτερατεύετο, διηγούμενος πρὸς τοὺς ζῶντας περὶ τῶν οἰκείων, οἷς ἐν ᾍδου συντετυχηκέναι ἔλεγεν.</foreign></quote>
                    <p/>    
                    
                <p/>
                </div>
                
                <div type="textpart" n="Catalogue of occurences">
                    <head>Catalogue of occurences</head>
                    <p/>
                    <list rend="bulleted">
                        <item><ref type="lit">Plat. Men. 81a-b, Phaed. 70c-d and 72a </ref></item>
                        
                        <item><ref type="lit">Philo VM II 65, Aet. 10,76 (= Boeth. Sid. SVF III 613) and 14,47 (= Chrysipp. SVF II 613), Leg. ad G. 325, Post. Caini 124 and Cherub. 114 </ref></item>
                        
                        <item><ref type="lit">Plut. Esu carn. I 996c and II 998c, Is. 364f and 379e-f </ref></item>
                        
                        <item><ref type="lit">NT Mt. 19,28 and Tt. 3,5 </ref></item>
                        
                        <item><ref type="lit">Marc. Aur. XI 1,2-3 </ref></item>
                        
                        <item><ref type="lit">CH 3,3 and 13,1</ref></item>
                        
                        <item><ref type="lit">Alex. Aphr. In Arist. APr. p. 180,33-36 W. </ref></item>
                        
                        <item><ref type="lit">Porph. VP 19 (= Dicaearch. fr. 40 Mir. = Pythag. VS 14 A 8a) </ref></item>
                        
                        <item><ref type="lit">Serv. ad Verg. Aen. 3,68 </ref></item>
                        
                        <item><ref type="lit"><ref corresp="https://stephanus.tlg.uci.edu/Iris/demo/browser.jsp#doc=tlg&amp;aid=0743&amp;wid=001&amp;st=69057&amp;et=69071&amp;hl=%7B%22hl%22%3A%5B%7B%22start%22%3A69057%2C%22end%22%3A69071%2C%22color%22%3A%22HI1%22%2C%22backToStartSnippet%22%3Afalse%2C%22forwardToEndSnippet%22%3Afalse%2C%22outOfSnippet%22%3Afalse%7D%5D%7D&amp;type=browser">Nem. theol. Nat. hom. 2,35,4s. </ref></ref></item>
                        
                        <item><ref type="lit">Simpl. In Arist. Ph. p. 886,11 D. (= Chrysipp. SVF II 627) </ref></item>
                        
                        <item><ref type="lit">schol. Soph. El. 62 p. 118 X. </ref></item>
                        
                    </list>
                    <p/>
                </div>
                
                <div type="textpart" n="Discussion/interpretation">
                    <head>Discussion/interpretation</head>
                    <p/>
                    <p>1)<hi rend="italic"><persName key="Plato">Plato.</persName></hi> Even before taking into account the sources, it is fitting to consider the use of the verb <foreign xml:lang="grc">πάλιν γίγνεσθαι</foreign>, from which the <hi rend="italic">nomen actionis</hi> will effectively originate: used three times by <persName key="Plato">Plato</persName>, in the <ref><title>Phaedo</title></ref> (<ref type="lit">70c-d, 72a</ref>) and the <ref><title>Meno</title></ref> (<ref type="lit">81a-b</ref>), it pertains to the act of “begetting anew” of the souls, through a process which – according to <persName key="Plato">Plato</persName> (vd. <ref type="lit">Phaed. 70d</ref>), again – would be typical of a doctrine described in a no better defined <foreign xml:lang="grc">παλαιὸς λόγος</foreign>. 
                        Following <persName key="Plato">Plato</persName>’s proper usage of this ‘ancient’ <foreign xml:lang="grc">λόγος</foreign>, concerning the pre-platonic (above all theogonic) <rs type="Religious_Knowledge_Depository">myths</rs>, it is very likely that the above-mentioned notice of the <foreign xml:lang="grc">παλαιὸς λόγος</foreign> is referred to <rs type="Activities" subtype="Ritual_Practice">Orphism</rs> and actually to the anthropogonic and aetiologic (concerning eschatology) <rs type="Religious_Knowledge_Depository">myth</rs> of <rs type="Superhuman_Agents" subtype="Divinities"><persName type="Divine" key="Dionysus">Dionysus</persName></rs>’ dismemberment and devouring, carried out by the <rs type="Superhuman_Agents" subtype="Divinities">Titans</rs>: it is the same <rs type="Religious_Knowledge_Depository">myth</rs> which intends to illustrate the origin of both humankind, from the hashes of the <rs type="Superhuman_Agents" subtype="Divinities">Titans</rs> themselves (struck with lightning by <rs type="Superhuman_Agents" subtype="Divinities"><persName type="Divine" key="Zeus">Zeus</persName></rs>), and primordial guilt, innate to humanity as titanic offspring.</p>
                    <p>If, in <ref type="lit">Phaed. 70d-72a</ref>, it seems to be no eschatological or anti-somatic feature – thus linked to the catharsis of the soul from the body-prison – as, on the contrary, it is more explicitly inferred by other passages (cf. <ref type="lit">Plat. Crat. 400b-c</ref>, <ref type="lit">Gorg. 492e-f</ref>), <persName key="Plato">Plato</persName>’s intention indeed is that to logically demonstrate, in conformity with the <foreign xml:lang="la">coincidentia oppositorum</foreign>, the immortality of the soul, even implied by the <rs type="Human_Agents" subtype="Groups">Orphics</rs>. 
                        So, it is probable that the platonic <foreign xml:lang="grc">πάλιν γίγνεσθαι</foreign> has to be considered as a link to the cathartic process of souls, which, during their purifying <hi rend="italic">iter</hi> – if not yet ready to achieve beatitude (alongside <rs type="Super-human_Agents" subtype="Divinities"><persName type="divine" key="Persephone">Persephone</persName></rs>) – are compelled to be inputted again into the cycle of rebirths, to expiate their original guilt. 
                        Despite the two doctrines, described in <ref type="lit">Crat. 400b-c</ref> and in <ref type="lit">Gorg. 492e-f</ref>, and on the other hand in <ref type="lit">Phaed. 70d-72a</ref>, could seem distinct, as if it might be presumed a more <rs type="Religious_Knowledge_Depository">Orphic doctrine</rs> (of the <foreign xml:lang="grc">σῶμα/σῆμα</foreign>, indeed), and another of a more Pythagorean kind (without eschatological nor anti-somatic implications), it is also true that <persName key="Plato">Plato</persName> (<ref type="lit">Phaed. 70d</ref>) clearly asserts that he has already previously mentioned (in <ref><title><hi rend="italic">Phaedo</hi></title></ref> itself) the <foreign xml:lang="grc">παλαιὸς λόγος</foreign>, about which he is going to speak again – <foreign xml:lang="grc">παλαιὸς μὲν οὖν ἔστι τις λόγος οὗ μεμνήμεθα</foreign> – and in fact, in <ref type="lit">69c</ref>, the <rs type="Activities" subtype="Ritual_practice">Orphic catharsis</rs> is unquestionably brought up.</p>
                    <p>It is therefore unlikely that this Heraclitean kind of demonstration of the soul’s immortality (in <ref type="lit">Plat. Phaed. 70d-72a</ref>) conceals another doctrine: the <foreign xml:lang="grc">παλαιὸς λόγος</foreign> – often quoted concerning ancient <rs type="Religious_Knowledge_Depository">myths</rs> – only pertains the anthropogonic and <rs type="Religious_Knowledge_Depository">eschatological myth</rs> of the <rs type="Human_Agents" subtype="Groups">Orphics</rs>; 
                        if it might be supposed that this <foreign xml:lang="grc">παλαιὸς λόγος</foreign> has to be linked to a different form of religiosity, it would be possible to think of <rs type="Religious_Knowledge_Depository">Eleusinian myths</rs> and <rs type="Activities" subtype="Ritual_Practice">rites</rs> (well known by <persName key="Plato">Plato</persName>), but they – even though very familiar with the idea of the cyclicity of nature – do not provide for any cycle of the souls, in eschatological terms. 
                        The ultimate aim of the initiate is in fact the attainment of the beatitude in <rs type="Super-human_Agents" subtype="Divinities"><persName type="divine" key="Hades">Hades</persName></rs> – as opposed to the oblivion and shadow, threatened by the <rs type="Religious_Knowledge_Depository">Olympian religiosity</rs> – but with no reference to a “return to generation” of souls.</p>
                    <p>To sum up, it is plausible that <persName key="Plato">Plato</persName> used the verb <foreign xml:lang="grc">πάλιν γίγνεσθαι</foreign>, so that he might mention the cycle of rebirths as the destiny of souls not yet reserving the full bliss of the overworld, and therefore reintroduced into generation and a new body: <persName key="Plutarch">Plutarch</persName> (<ref type="lit">Esu carn. 996c</ref>) – defining it as a <foreign xml:lang="grc">παλαιὸς λόγος</foreign> – also asserted that the dismemberment of <rs type="Super-human_Agents" subtype="Divinities"><persName type="divine" key="Dionysus_Zagreus">Zagreus</persName></rs> was a <rs type="Religious_Knowledge_Depository">myth of palingenesis</rs>, <foreign xml:lang="grc">ᾐνιγμένος ἐστὶ μῦθος εἰς τὴν παλιγγενεσίαν</foreign> (cf. infra). The <foreign xml:lang="grc">πάλιν γίγνεσθαι</foreign> is thus an aspect not in contrast, but complementary to the already<rs type="Religious_Knowledge_Depository"> Orphic doctrine</rs> of the <foreign xml:lang="grc">σῶμα/σῆμα</foreign>.</p>
                    <p></p>
                   
                    
                    <p>2) <hi rend="italic">Pre-platonic and Pythagorean testimonies.</hi> Despite the occurrences of the verb <foreign xml:lang="grc">πάλιν γίγνεσθαι</foreign> are above all platonic, it is very probable that its usage was already widespread (cf. Casadio 1991, 122), and that <persName key="Plato">Plato</persName> had taken it from other <rs type="Religious_Knowledge_Depository">Orphic-Pythagorean lores</rs>. Riedweg (2007, 121), indeed, was sure enough that the only doctrine attributable to <persName key="Pythagoras">Pythagoras</persName> was the transmigration of souls, and also that this belief had been handed down by <persName key="Pherekydes_of_Syros">Pherekydes of Syros</persName> (VI sec. BC): the many testimonies of the alleged discipleship of <persName key="Pythagoras">Pythagoras</persName> at the Syrius – I think, first of all (but not only), of <ref type="lit">Aristox. fr. 14 W.</ref> and <ref type="lit">Dicaearch. fr. 34 W.</ref> (= <ref type="lit">Pherekyd. Syr. VS 7 A 1, 4 = frr. 26 e 29c Sch.</ref>) – would be in fact indications of a doctrinal similarity, which can be truly found in the faith on transmigration of the soul, of that <persName key="Pherekydes_of_Syros">Pherekydes</persName> would have previously written: vd. <ref type="lit">Pherecyd. Syr. A 5</ref> = <ref type="lit">fr. 7 Sch. ap. Cic. Tusc. I 16,38, A 5</ref>= <ref type="lit">fr. 86b Sch. ap. Apon. V 23 e A 2</ref> = f<ref type="lit">r. 2 Sch. ap. Suda φ 214 A</ref>., e inoltre <ref type="lit">B 6s.</ref> = <ref type="lit">frr. 87s. Sch. ap. Porph. Gaur. 2,2</ref> (= <ref type="lit">Num. fr. 36 Des Places</ref>) e <ref type="lit">Antr. 31</ref> (I refer particularly to Schibli 1990, 12f. and West 1971, 2).</p>
                    <p>Of course, it is not astonishing that, despite the neutrality of the verb <foreign xml:lang="grc">πάλιν γίγνεσθαι</foreign> – which, by itself, means “begetting anew” – <persName key="Plato">Plato</persName> brought it up in the field of <rs type="Religious_Knowledge_Depository">Orphic eschatology</rs>, but the idea of the return to <hi rend="italic">genesis</hi>, without moral nor anti-somatic implications, could be attributed to <persName key="Pythagoras">Pythagoras</persName>: he, according to <persName key="Diogenes_Laertius">Diogenes Laertius</persName> (<ref type="lit">VIII 4</ref>), believed in the <foreign xml:lang="grc">κύκλος ἀνάγκης</foreign> of the souls, but in this case not intended to expiation of primordial guilt (cf. e.g. Vegetti 1994, 84-88 and Tortorelli Ghidini 2006, 20f.).
                        The idea of the eschatological <foreign xml:lang="grc">κύκλος</foreign> might also be read in the <foreign xml:lang="la"><hi rend="italic">lamina aurea</hi></foreign> of <placeName key="Thuri">Thuri</placeName> (vd. <ref type="lit">Orph. fr. 32 IVc K. = 488,5 B. = 4 [A 65] C.</ref>), though it is a <foreign xml:lang="grc">κύκλος</foreign>, in this case, <foreign xml:lang="grc">βαρυπενθὴς ἀργαλέος</foreign>, which has to be avoided, indeed (the verb used is <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἐκπέτομαι</foreign>, ‘to fly away’, not casually). It must not be ruled out the possibility that <ref type="lit">Diog. Laert. l.c.</ref>, linking <persName key="Pythagoras">Pythagoras</persName> to the belief in the <foreign xml:lang="grc">κύκλος ἀνάγκης</foreign>, misunderstood the Pythagorean doctrine and, as a consequence, he would have ascribed to it this eschatological lore, instead proper of the <rs type="Religious_Knowledge_Depository">Orphism</rs>: cf. e.g. <ref type="lit">Orph. frr. 224 K. = 388 B. = 4 [B 65] C.</ref> <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἀμειβομένη ψυχὴ κατὰ κύκλα χρόνοιο</foreign>, e <ref type="lit">20 K. = 467,4 B. = 4 [A 44] C.</ref> </p>
                    <p>Another occurrence of the verb <foreign xml:lang="grc">πάλιν γίγνεσθαι</foreign> is attested in the Neoplatonic <persName key="Porphyry">Porphyry</persName>, who, in his <ref type="lit"><title>Vita Pithagorae</title> (19)</ref>, ascribes to the Samian philosopher (cf. <ref type="lit">VS 14 A 8a</ref>) a doctrine on the cyclicity not only of souls – for which they are therefore immortal, and they can transmigrate in other animal species (since every living being has to be considered of the same nature) – but also of time. Despite his models, influenced by the <rs type="Religious_Knowledge_Depository">Orphic-Platonic eschatology</rs>, <persName key="Porphyry">Porphyry</persName> (l.c.) does not hint at any anti-somatic teaching, and he attributes this doctrine to <persName key="Pythagoras">Pythagoras</persName>, quoting a testimony that dates back to <persName key="Dicaearchus">Dicaearchus</persName> (vd. <ref type="lit">frr. 40f. Mir.</ref>, and cf. Burkert 1972, 122f.; White 2001, 212f. e n. 38; contra esp. Lévy 1926, 51).</p>
                    
                    <p>This (alleged) Pythagorean doctrine on souls’ cyclicity as a consequence of the same cyclicity of time may be also read in <persName key="Eudemus">Eudemus</persName> (<ref type="lit">fr. 88 W.</ref>), and it refers to the Pythagorean image that specifically <persName key="Heraclides_Ponticus">Heraclides Ponticus</persName> – truly interested in this doctrine on the soul of <persName key="Pythagoras">Pythagoras</persName> – had contributed to shape. The passage of <persName key="Porphyry">Porphyry</persName> (l.c.), above mentioned, is also coherent with some Aristotelian testimonies (<ref type="lit">An. 407b 20-30 = Pyth. VS 58 B 39, 414a 22-25 = B 34</ref>), where – speaking about no-better defined <foreign xml:lang="grc">Πυθαγορικοὶ μύθοι</foreign> (<ref type="lit">B 39</ref>), or <foreign xml:lang="grc">οἱ Πυθαγορείοι</foreign> (<ref type="lit">B 34</ref>) – <persName key="Aristotle">Aristotle</persName> argued about the ancient Pythagorean doctrine on transmigration, as described in <ref type="lit">Poprh. l.c.</ref>, i.e. <ref type="lit">Dicaearch. fr. 41 M.</ref>, because it nullified his theory of soul as <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἐντελέχεια</foreign>: vd. e.g. <ref type="lit">An. 412a 27</ref> (cf. in merito Alesse 2000, 402-406).</p>
                    <p>If the verb <foreign xml:lang="grc">πάλιν γίγνεσθαι</foreign> firstly signified the return to life by re-incorporation (as probably divulged by the Pythagorean circle), then it had been used in order to exhaustively explain the sense of evil in the world, since, according to the Orphic dualism of body and soul, the return to flesh is cause and evidence of an innate guilt, which has to be truly expiated through ‘palingenesis’ (on this subject, Dodds 1951, 150-152 is still valid): <persName key="Plato">Plato</persName>, in his <ref><title><hi rend="italic">Phaedo</hi></title></ref>, might have drawn the meaning of <foreign xml:lang="grc">πάλιν γίγνεσθαι</foreign> from this specific contest.</p>
                    
                    <p>It is also highly probable that the palingenetic <rs type="Religious_Knowledge_Depository">Pythagorean doctrine</rs> must not have been associated with <rs type="Activities" subtype="Ritual_Practice">expiation</rs> and <rs type="Activities" subtype="Ritual_Practice">catharsis</rs>, but with the chance of attaining, in the next life, a condition closer to semi-divinity and full wisdom, solely thanks to reincarnations: the journey to the hypogean realm (of <placeName type="Divine" key="Hades">Hades</placeName>) is thus the sapiential itinerary par excellence, and that might be also well deduced by the platonic (in <ref type="lit">Crat. 404b</ref>) para-etymology, which evokes an otherworldly conception already present in <ref><title>Parmenides</title></ref>, e.g. <ref type="lit">VS 28 B 2</ref> (cf. Cerri 1995, 458-467 and Viscardi 2014, 146-157). In this regard, in the scholium to <ref type="lit"><persName key="Sophocles">Sophocles</persName>’ <title>Electra</title> (62 p. 118 X. = Suda η 88 A.</ref>) the term <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign> is read in the merit of what <persName key="Pythagoras">Pythagoras</persName> would have learned after he had come back from a hypogeic space, very similar to the underground chamber of the Herodotean <rs type="Super-human_Agents" subtype="Divine_Figures"><persName type="Divine" key="Zalmoxis">Zalmoxis</persName></rs> (<ref type="lit">II 95,4s.</ref>): <foreign xml:lang="grc">Πυθαγόρας καθείρξας ἑαυτὸν ἐν ὑπογείῳ λογοποιεῖν ἐκέλευσε τὴν μητέρα ὡς ἄρα τεθνηκὼς ἔοι. καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα ἐπιφανεὶς περὶ παλιγγενεσίας</foreign>. 
                        The scholium also has evident affinities with both the parody of the Pythagorean iter to <placeName type="Divine" key="Hades">Hades</placeName>, narrated by <ref type="lit"><persName key="Hermyppus">Hermyppus</persName> (fr. 20 W. = FGrHist. 1026 F 24</ref>) and with the tradition of <ref type="lit"><persName key="Heraclides_Ponticus">Heraclides Ponticus</persName> (fr. 89 W.</ref>), that refers the previous incarnations of <persName key="Pythagoras">Pythagoras</persName> (cf. Lévy 1926, 37-40; Burkert 1972, 138 and n. 100, 156 and n. 200; Coscia 2017, 142).  </p>
                    <p>As evidence of a possible <rs type="Religious_Knowledge_Depository">Pythagorean doctrine</rs>, as distinct from the <foreign xml:lang="grc">πάλιν γίγνεσθαι</foreign> which <persName key="Plato">Plato</persName> wrote about (see above), it is notable an account by <ref type="lit"><persName key="Servius">Servius</persName> (ad Verg. Aen. 3,68)</ref>, where he specifies that <persName key="Pythagoras">Pythagoras</persName> spoke of <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign>, and not of <foreign xml:lang="grc">μετεμψύχωσις</foreign>. The author seems to prove his knowledge of, and perhaps even to recognise, a clear distinction between palingenesis and metempsychosis, while this last term was firstly attested in <ref type="lit"><persName key="Diodorus_Siculus">Diodorus Siculus</persName>, X 6,1</ref> (cf. Casadio 1991, 122). 
                        If <persName key="Plato">Plato</persName> used the verb <foreign xml:lang="grc">πάλιν γίγνεσθαι</foreign> to refer to the <rs type="Religious_Knowledge_Depository">Orphic doctrine</rs> of expiation through the return to the body and generation, and although the same eschatology was then expressed by the terms <foreign xml:lang="grc">μετεμψύχωσις</foreign> or <foreign xml:lang="grc">μετενσωμάτωσις</foreign> – a term (the latter) even later, dating back to the 2nd century AD (cf. p. 123) – it is certainly noteworthy that a precise distinction is made here between the re-injection of the soul into the body, which still pertains to the ethical-moral sphere (pro meritis vitae prioris), and the more ‘neutral’ palingenesis, <foreign xml:lang="la">hoc est</foreign> – to use <persName key="Servius">Servius</persName>’ own words – <foreign xml:lang="la">redire, sed post tempus</foreign>. <persName key="Servius">Servius</persName> likely drew the term <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign> not from late Platonism, but rather from Stoicism, since he placed the Stoic doctrine on the immortality of the soul between the Pythagorean <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign> and the Platonic <foreign xml:lang="grc">μετεμψύχωσις</foreign>, defining it as a sort of crasis of them (cf. Pellizzari 2003, 150). What is thus surprising is the need to specify a distinction between the two terms, when they were often treated as synonyms. <ref type="lit"><persName key="Cronius">Cronius</persName> (fr. 12 Leem. ap. Nem. Nat. hom. p. 116,3f. Matth.</ref>) wrote a volume <ref><title><foreign xml:lang="grc">Περὶ <w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign></title></ref>, where the faith in the immortality of souls was strongly influenced by <persName key="Numenius_of_Apamea">Numenius of Apamea</persName> (see Dillon 2010, 423f.), who considered transmigration to be a real misfortune (think about <ref type="lit">Num. fr. 48</ref> Des Places). It is therefore understandable that <persName key="Nemesius">Nemesius</persName> (l.c.) interpreted <persName key="Cronius">Cronius</persName>’ <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign> as <foreign xml:lang="grc">μετενσωμάτωσις</foreign> – <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἐν τῷ περὶ παλιγγενεσίας (οὕτω δὲ καλεῖ τὴν μετενσωμάτωσιν)</foreign> – a term with anti-somatic connotations and links to the Origenian tradition (cf. Casadio 1991, 123). </p>
                    
                    
                    <p></p>
                    
                    <p>3) <hi rend="italic">Stoic occurrences.</hi> Stoicism uses the term <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign> only concerning cosmology and the cyclical nature of the world, which precisely ‘regenerates’ itself as a result of its own ‘conflagration’ (<foreign xml:lang="grc">ἐκπύρωσις</foreign>). The very first occurrences of the nomen actionis <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign> date back to <persName key="Philo_Alexandrinus">Philo Alexandrinus</persName>, who, in <ref type="lit"><title>De aeternitate mundi</title> (14,47)</ref>, quotes <ref type="lit"><persName key="Chrysippus">Chrysippus</persName> (SVF II 613</ref>), referring to the Stoics as “proponents of the ecpyrosis and palingenesis of the world”, and, in <ref type="lit"><title>De vita Mosis</title> (II 65)</ref>, gives evidence of drawing the concept of ‘palingenesis’ from a Stoic context (cf. Dey 1937, 8f.). Although he assimilated much of the palingenetic doctrine, <persName key="Philo_Alexandrinus">Philo</persName> – for religious reasons (cf. Pohlenz 1967, 201) – did not share the idea of the cyclical nature of the cosmos at all, since he was convinced of the <hi rend="italic">ex nihilo</hi> creation of the world, or rather its formation from a pre-existing matter, thus interpreting the Jewish <rs type="Super-human_Agents" subtype="Divinities"><persName type="Divine" key="God">God</persName></rs> platonically as the <rs type="Super-human_Agents" subtype="Divinities">Demiurge</rs> and biblically as the <rs type="Super-human_Agents" subtype="Divinities">Creator</rs> (cf. Reale 1994, 45-51). In this regard, also consider <ref type="lit">Ph. Aet. 10.76 ap. SVF III 7</ref> <foreign xml:lang="grc">τὰς ἐκπυρώσεις καὶ <w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσίας</w></foreign>: here the doctrine of cyclicity is rejected by <persName key="Boethius_Sidonius">Boethius Sidonius</persName> and <persName key="Panetius">Panetius</persName>, who took the side of what, according to <persName key="Philo_Alexandrinus">Philo</persName>, was the ‘more pious’ (<foreign xml:lang="grc">ὁσιώτερον</foreign>) doctrine of the incorruptibility of the world (cf. Dey 1937, 10).</p>
                    <p><ref type="lit"><persName key="Marcus_Aurelius">Marcus Aurelius</persName> (XI 1.2f. )</ref>, who picks up on Stoic philosophy, speaking of the rational soul, re-proposes an already ancient liaison between the cyclical nature of the soul and that of the cosmos, insofar as the revolutions of the soul are an integral part of the macroscopic revolutions of the world itself, and he makes it very clear how the theme of <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign> is also intertwined with that of wisdom and memory, since (according to the philosopher) the sensible forty-year-old man may be able to recognise past and future events, thanks to their conformity: <foreign xml:lang="grc">καὶ περινοεῖ καὶ θεωρεῖ ὅτι οὐδὲν νεώτερον ὄψονται οἱ μεθ’ ἡμᾶς οὺδὲ περιττότερον εἶδον οἱ πρὸ ἡμῶν</foreign>.</p>
                    <p>In his commentary on <ref type="lit"><persName key="Aristotle">Aristotle</persName>’s <title>Physics</title> (p. 886,11 D.</ref>), <persName key="Simplicius">Simplicius</persName> quotes the Stoics (cf. <ref type="lit">Chrysipp. SVF II 627</ref>), regarding their palingenetic doctrine: in palingenesis (<foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign>, scil. of the world) individuals get to become themselves again (<foreign xml:lang="grc">τὸν αὐτὸν ἐμὲ πάλιν γίνεσθαι</foreign>). Once again thanks to <persName key="Simplicius">Simplicius</persName> (In <ref type="lit">Ph. p. 732,23 D.</ref>), the above-mentioned testimony of <ref type="lit"><persName key="Eudemus">Eudemus</persName> (fr. 88 W.)</ref>, from which it might be inferred that the Peripatetic – and <persName key="Aristotle">Aristotle</persName> (also think of <ref type="lit">Dicaearch. fr. 40 Mir.</ref>) – had to know a doctrine of a cosmic palingenesis, very similar to the one found in Stoic testimonies, which he attributed to <persName key="Pythagoras">Pythagoras</persName>. 
                        In the field of Aristotelian commentaries, an interesting passage by <persName key="Alexander_of_Aphrodisias">Alexander of Aphrodisias</persName> (In <ref type="lit">Arist. Apr. p. 180,31-36 W.</ref>) bears witness to the use, in <ref type="lit"><persName key="Chrysippus">Chrysippus</persName> (SVF II 624)</ref>, of the verb <foreign xml:lang="grc">πάλιν γίγνεσθαι</foreign>, regarding the regeneration both of the cosmos and of the very quality of the individual in the regenerated world: this use of the verb – reflecting Platonic dictation – probably goes back to the original text of <persName key="Chrysippus">Chrysippus</persName>, since, after <persName key="Philo_Alexandrinus">Philo of Alexandria</persName>, the occurrences of the verbal form are decidedly less frequent. </p>
                    <p>It is also clear that the first Stoicism (of <persName key="Zeno">Zeno</persName>, e.g.) might have undergone the influence of <persName key="Heraclitus">Heraclitus</persName> (cf., for instance, <ref type="lit">VS 22 B 65, 67 and 90</ref>), although it had not inherited his lexis: <ref type="lit">B 65 (ap. Plut. E ap. Delph. 388e</ref>) in fact betrays the Stoic exegesis of the <foreign xml:lang="grc">χρησμοσύνη</foreign> as <foreign xml:lang="grc">διακόσμησις</foreign> and of the Heraclitean <foreign xml:lang="grc">κόρος</foreign> as <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἐκπύρωσις</foreign> (cf. Pohlenz 1967, 149 n. 7). However, there do not seem to be any occurrences of the term <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign>, nor in its verbal form <foreign xml:lang="grc">πάλιν γίγνεσθαι</foreign>, that could be traced back to <persName key="Heraclitus">Heraclitus</persName> – who rather prefers to write of ‘exchange’ (<foreign xml:lang="grc">ἀνταμοιβή</foreign>) of fire – where it is instead repeatedly attested for <persName key="Pythagoras">Pythagoras</persName>.</p>
                    <p></p>
                    
                    
                    <p>4) <hi rend="italic"><persName key="Philo_Alexandrinus">Philo of Alexandria</persName> and <persName key="Plutarch">Plutarch</persName>.</hi> Some information that <persName key="Philo_Alexandrinus">Philo</persName> offered on Stoicism should not be misleading: as for the notion of the cosmic <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign>, <persName key="Philo_Alexandrinus">Philo</persName> did not share it at all – and he indeed rejected it altogether (see above) – and, more generally, it is worth pointing out that the meaning of the Philonian <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign> is truly peculiar, and it is therefore complex to trace its precedents, since there might be found in it traces both of Greek (mysteric, as well as Platonic or Stoic spies), and of biblical-Judaic culture: in short, it might be assumed that <persName key="Philo_Alexandrinus">Philo</persName> had a good knowledge of both cultures, so that he read the <rs type="Religious_Knowledge_Depository" subtype="Texts">Scriptures</rs> in allegorical terms, through the filter of Greek philosophy (cf. Reale-Radice 2011, passim). In the <ref type="lit"><title>Legatio ad Gaium</title> (325)</ref>, the word <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign> takes on a meaning almost foreign to the discourse on the soul, but it is closer to the Stoic one on the regeneration of the cosmos, as well as in the <ref type="lit"><title>De vita Mosis</title> (II 65)</ref>, in which <rs type="Human_Agents"><persName type="Myth" key="Noah">Noah</persName></rs> and his family are “leaders of the regeneration” (<foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσίας</w></foreign> … <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἡγημόνες</foreign>) of the precisely renewed world after the Flood (cf. also <ref type="lit">Alex. Invent. cruc. LXXXVII/3 p. 4024.22 M.</ref>).
                    </p>
                    <p>The concept of re-incorporation seems to be closer to the use of <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign>, found in <ref type="lit"><persName key="Philo_Alexandrinus">Philo</persName> Post. Caini 124</ref>, where the biblical episode of <rs type="Super-human_Agents" subtype="Divinities"><persName type="Divine" key="Seth">Seth</persName></rs>’s birth is taken up: after <rs type="Human_Agents"><persName type="Myth" key="Abel">Abel</persName></rs>’s death, it is interpreted as the “return to life” of his brother, murdered by <rs type="Human_Agents"><persName type="Myth" key="Cain">Cain</persName></rs> (<foreign xml:lang="grc">τὴν δ’ ὥσπερ παλιγγενεσίαν Ἄβελ τοῦ δολοφονηθέντος</foreign>). But <ref type="lit"><title>Genesis</title> (4,1-16)</ref>, just recalled, is also susceptible to allegoresis, so that <rs type="Human_Agents"><persName type="Myth" key="Abel">Abel</persName></rs> is the rational soul, which tends to ascend to <rs type="Super-human_Agents" subtype="Divinities"><persName type="Divine" key="God">God</persName></rs> and the incorporeal, and <rs type="Human_Agents"><persName type="Myth" key="Cain">Cain</persName></rs> is the irrational part of the soul, instead anchored to matter; according to the Philonian allegoresis, <rs type="Super-human_Agents" subtype="Divinities"><persName type="Divine" key="Seth">Seth</persName></rs> – para-etymologically ‘irrigation’ (<foreign xml:lang="grc">Σὴθ ἑρμηνεύεται ποτισμός</foreign>) – would thus be the sprout which, according to the divine will, shall lead the soul to regeneration, i.e. to the incorporeal and the full contemplation of <rs type="Super-human_Agents" subtype="Divinities"><persName type="Divine" key="God">God</persName></rs> (cf. esp. Burnett 1984, 467).</p>
                    
                    <p>This peculiar meaning of the word <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign> could be also deduced from another Philonian occurrence: in <ref type="lit"><title>De Cherubim</title> (114)</ref>, following some questions on human eschatology and the origin of the soul, <persName key="Philo_Alexandrinus">Philo</persName> answers that – once again according to <rs type="Super-human_Agents" subtype="Divinities"><persName type="Divine" key="God">God</persName></rs>’s will – humankind’s destiny is to access to palingenesis, to become indeed a being no longer qualified by the composition of bodies (<foreign xml:lang="grc">εἰς παλιγγενεσίαν ὁρμήσομεν οἱ μετὰ ἀσωμάτων σύγκριτοι ποιοί</foreign>). So, it might be inferred not only that the <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign> is proper of the (rational) soul – deprived and indeed released from the body – but also that it signified, based on Philo, the access to the immaterial divinity (i.e. to <rs type="Super-human_Agents" subtype="Divinities"><persName type="Divine" key="God">God</persName></rs>) granted to the virtuous and immortal soul: this is a theory which, in these terms, is found neither in Greek nor in Judaic culture, though, to some extents, indebted to both of them (cf. pp. 452-467, passim).</p>
                    <p>Since, in <persName key="Philo_Alexandrinus">Philo</persName> (who the first occurrences belong to), the meaning of the <foreign xml:lang="la">nomen actionis</foreign> is opposite to the Greek one – because the verb <foreign xml:lang="grc">πάλιν γίγνεσθαι</foreign> was in fact meant to signify the return to regeneration and especially to the body, both in its more neutral (i.e. Pythagorean) acceptation and of course in its anti-somatic (Orphic and Platonic) one – the a-somatic character of the Philonian <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign> seems to derive from the Judaic component, that in this case reworks, according to its own needs, the Greek lexis related to the semantic field of the return to life (cf. e.g. Baretta 2014, 74 and n. 9 for the relevant bibliography). In <persName key="Philo_Alexandrinus">Philo</persName>’s lexis, the word <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign> signifies therefore the permanent reborn of the soul, but in a status of incorporeal existence: <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἀσώματος</foreign> e <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἄποιος</foreign>, as it might be read in <ref type="lit">Cherub. 114</ref>.</p>
                    
                    <p>Given both Platonic and Stoic influences, it is difficult, however, to determine the matrix of <persName key="Plutarch">Plutarch</persName>’s <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign>. Although <persName key="Philo_Alexandrinus">Philo</persName> is included among the Alexandrian Platonists, the occurrences of the term <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign>, in his case, are mostly to be ascribed to a Stoic influence, since they refer to the doctrine of the cyclical nature of the cosmos (see above). 
                        <persName key="Plutarch">Plutarch</persName>, on the other hand, in the two occurrences in the <ref type="lit"><title>De esu carnium</title> (996c and 998c</ref>) makes explicit reference to the traditionally Pythagorean and Orphic norm of abstaining from eating animal flesh: in <ref type="lit">996c</ref>, the <foreign xml:lang="grc">μῦθος</foreign> of the dismemberment of <rs type="Super-human_Agents" subtype="Divinities"><persName type="Divine" key="Dionysus">Dionysus-Zagreus</persName></rs> “refers in enigmatic terms to palingenesis”, and the myth of the <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign> is the same <foreign xml:lang="grc">παλαιότερος λόγος</foreign> (cited shortly before by <persName key="Plutarch">Plutarch</persName> himself) of clear Platonic origin (see above; cf. Casadio 1991, 132-134); in <ref type="lit">998c</ref>, the context is similar – since <persName key="Plutarch">Plutarch</persName> still writes about the doctrine of the immortality of the soul – but it is doubtful and controversial whether the author, in the light of this passage, believed in the regeneration of souls or not: from the <persName key="Plutarch">Plutarch</persName>'s text – <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἀλλ’ ἐὰν μὴ προσαποδείξῃ τις, ὅτι χρῶνται κοινοῖς αἱ ψυχαὶ σώμασιν ἐν ταῖς παλιγγενεσίαις (κτλ.)</foreign> – indeed, it seems that the demonstration of such a doctrine is impossible (cf. Tsekourakis 1987, 380-383, and also Inglese-Santese 1999, 224f. ad l.; contra esp. Casadio, l.c.).</p>
                    <p>However, other occurrences of the term <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign> may clarify its meaning in <persName key="Plutarch">Plutarch</persName>, and thus show how he used it as an ante litteram historian of religions: in Is. 379e-f, <persName key="Plutarch">Plutarch</persName> rejected the idea that the belief in the transmigration of souls in the bodies of animals was at the bottom of <rs type="belief">Egyptian theriomorphism</rs>; and, in 364f, once again associates <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign> with the <rs type="Religious_Knowledge_Depository">Orphic myth</rs> of <rs type="Super-human_Agents" subtype="Divinities"><persName type="Divine" key="Dionysus">Dionysus</persName></rs> and the <rs type="Super-human_Agents" subtype="Divinities">Titans</rs> (cf. Griffiths 1970, 434 and 545 ad ll.). This proves Casadio (1991, 132) right when he argued <persName key="Plutarch">Plutarch</persName>’s dependence – at least concerning the semantic field of the doctrine on the soul – on the Platonic tradition, but his belief in the Orphic-Platonic dualism of <foreign xml:lang="grc">σῶμα/σῆμα</foreign>, i.e. in the body as the prison of the soul, remains doubtful: such an anti-somantic tendency does not seem to belong to <persName key="Plutarch">Plutarch</persName> and, indeed, in the <ref type="lit"><foreign xml:lang="grc"><title>Περὶ/Υπὲρ κάλλους</title></foreign> (fr. 144 Sandb. ap. Stob. IV 21.12</ref>) he argued that soul and body have their virtues, in both cases not to be disregarded (cf. Dillon 2010, 235f.).</p>
                    
                    <p></p>
                    
                    <p>5) <hi rend="italic">Judeo-Christian palingenesis and <rs type="Activities" subtype="Ritual_Practice">baptism</rs>.</hi> From Judaic literature, which was nourished by Greek philosophy and lexis, the term <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign> spread into the Christian sphere. In the <ref type="lit"><time>Septuagint</time> (in Jb. 14,14</ref>) we read the verb <foreign xml:lang="grc">πάλιν γίγνεσθαι</foreign> and it probably derives from the Platonic text, since it is a translation that precedes the first occurrence of the nomen actionis: <rs type="Human_Agents"><persName type="Myth" key="Job">Job</persName></rs> asks <rs type="Super-human_Agents" subtype="Divinities"><persName type="Divine" key="God">God</persName></rs> if it is possible to return to life after death, <foreign xml:lang="grc">ὑπομενῶ ἕως ἂν πάλιν γένωμαι</foreign> (cf. the commentary of <ref type="lit">Jo. Chrys. Fragm. in Jb. LXIV p. 600.32 M.</ref> <foreign xml:lang="grc">τῆς ἐκ νεκρῶν παλιγγενεσίας</foreign>).</p>
                    <p><ref type="lit"><persName key="Josephus Flavius">Josephus Flavius</persName> (AJ XI 3.9)</ref>, and especially <persName key="Philo_Alexandrinus">Philo Alexandrinus</persName> (see above), contributed to the dissemination of the term, which passed from the speculative context of Greek thought to the Jewish tradition, where it served to express the eschatological motif and turn of the regeneration of the world (cf. in particular Oberlinner 1999, III 218). The influence of sapiential literature, e.g. of the <ref type="lit"><title>Corpus Hermeticum</title> (3,3 and esp. 13,1)</ref>, should not be overlooked: here <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign> – a term now derived from the Greek mysteric context and with a religious meaning (cf. Dey 1937, 31) – indicates the ultimate apocryphal doctrine, which the disciple and son <rs type="Super-human_Agents" subtype="Divinities"><persName type="Divine" key="Tat">Tat</persName> (<persName type="Divine" key="Toth">Toth</persName></rs>) wants to learn from his father <rs type="Super-human_Agents" subtype="Divinities"><persName type="Divine" key="Hermes">Hermes Trismegistus</persName></rs>, in order to gain access to salvation (cf. <ref type="lit">CH 13</ref>).
                    </p>
                    <p>The majority of occurrences of <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign>, in the corpus of Christian literature, occur in connection with <foreign xml:lang="grc">τὸ λουτρὸν (τῆς <w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσίας</w>)</foreign>, that is the <foreign xml:lang="la">lavacrum resurrectionis</foreign>, indicating the <rs type="Activities" subtype="Ritual_practice">baptism</rs>, and thus the rebirth – albeit in earthly life – of the individual in <rs type="Super-human_Agents" subtype="Divinities"><persName type="Divine" key="Christ">Christ</persName></rs>. In <ref type="lit"><persName key="Matthew">Matthew</persName> (19,28)</ref>, however, the term appears for the first time to express the eschatological renewal, triggered by the final arrival of the <rs type="Super-human_Agents" subtype="Divinities">Son of Man</rs> (cf. Dey 1937, 30s.): <foreign xml:lang="grc">ὑμεῖς οἱ ἀκολουθήσαντές μοι ἐν τῇ <w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign> (cf. <ref type="lit">Orig. Exhort. ad martyr. 14.10 Koets., Bas. Caes. Adv. Eunom. XXIX p. 709,1 M., Jo. Chrys. In Mt. LVIII p. 609,41</ref>). Although <ref type="lit">Mt. 19,27 and 29f.</ref> derive on the whole from <ref type="lit">Mc. 10:28-31</ref>, the logion of <ref type="lit">Mt. 19,28</ref> originates from Q – though this is difficult to reconstruct (cf. Gnilka 1991, II 253-255) – and is a specifically Matthian insertion (cf. in fact <ref type="lit">Lc. 22,28-30</ref>). Even the specific use of the term <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign> is here an innovation of <persName key="Matthew">Matthew</persName>, and refers in particular to the Jewish conception of the regeneration of the world, to be understood as a new divine creation (cf. p. 257, and Oberlinner 1999, III 217).</p>
                    
                    <p>While the second Christian generation expresses, through the Greek lexis, a concept proper to Judaic eschatology, in the contemporary literature of the <ref><title>Pastoral Epistles</title></ref>, and in particular in <ref type="lit"><title>Titus</title> (3,5)</ref>, <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign> (in the genitive) is now associated with the soteriological bath, with <foreign xml:lang="grc">τὸ λουτρόν – διὰ λουτροῦ <w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσίας</w></foreign> – and takes up the typically Christian baptismal theology: apart from the historical-religious precedents, the baptismal conception of <persName key="Paul_of_Tarsus">Paul of Tarsus</persName> shares the doctrine of renewal, also in the more traditionally mysteric aspect of the return to life after the experience of death: cf. e.g. <ref type="lit">Rom. 6,4</ref> <foreign xml:lang="grc">συνετάφημεν οὖν αὐτῷ διὰ τοῦ βαπτίσματος εἰς τὸν θάνατον</foreign> (cf. Iacono 1934, 373-376). 
                        In the post-Pauline literature, the baptismal theology then undergoes a linguistic formalisation, coming considerably closer to the semantic area of <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign> (cf. p. 372): cf., for example, <ref type="lit">Jo. 3,3-8</ref> <foreign xml:lang="grc">γενννηθῆναι ἄνωθεν</foreign>, <ref type="lit">I Petr. 1,3</ref> <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἀναγεννάω</foreign> (cf. p. 219), or consider the later testimony of <ref type="lit"><persName key="Didymus_Caecus">Didymus Caecus</persName> (Trin. XXXIX p. 676,4 M.</ref>), in his commentary on the <ref type="lit"><title>Epistle of Titus</title></ref>: <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἀναγενννήσας ἡμᾶς διὰ λουτροῦ <w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσίας</w>, κτλ.</foreign> (cf. <ref type="lit">Hesych. π 199 L.-H.</ref>).</p>
                    <p>The whole passage from <ref type="lit">Tt. 3,5f.</ref> – <foreign xml:lang="grc">κατὰ τὸ αὐτοῦ ἔλεος ἔσωσεν ἡμᾶς διὰ λουτροῦ παλιγγενεσίας καὶ ἀνακαινώσεως πνεύματος ἁγίου, οὗ ἐξέχεεν ἐφ’ ἡμᾶς πλουσίως διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν</foreign> – has been taken up by different quotations, which now also represents the majority of the occurrences of the term <foreign xml:lang="grc"><w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσία</w></foreign> in the wide corpus of Christian exegetical literature: see <ref type="lit">Athanas. theol. Quest. ad Antioch. Ducem XXVIII pp. 584,5 and 588,10 M</ref>., <ref type="lit">Sanct. trinit. p. 1209,32 (= Dialog. duo contra Maced. p. 1305,10)</ref>, <ref type="lit">Jo. Chrys. Ep. ad Tt. LXII pp. 692,14, 18 and 694,34</ref>, <ref type="lit">Sanct. Pentec. L p. 458,8</ref>, <ref type="lit">Theodoret. Interpr. in Ps. LXXX pp. 1688,40, 1740,11 and 1808,37</ref>, <ref type="lit">Expl. in Cant. Canticorum LXXXI pp. 105,37 and 137,15</ref>, <ref type="lit">Interpr. in XIV ep. sanct. Paul. LXXXII p. 868,35</ref>, <ref type="lit">Jo. Dam. Comm. in ep. Paul. XCV p. 1029,21.</ref></p>
                    <p></p>
                    <p>To sum up, it is clear that the formula <foreign xml:lang="grc">λουτρὸν <w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσίας</w></foreign> gets functioning to convey the baptismal theology, as firstly expressed in the Pauline circle, and that – from this contest – it has propagated in the Christian exegesis: cf. esp. <ref type="lit">Orig. In evang. Jo. fr. 36,32 Preusch</ref>. <foreign xml:lang="grc">λουτροῦ <w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσίας</w>, ὃ καὶ βάπτισμα θεῖον ὀνομάζεται</foreign>, <ref type="lit">Euseb. Comm. in Ps. XXIII p. 653,19, or p. 1288,30</ref> <foreign xml:lang="grc">περὶ τῆς ἐκ βαπτίσματος <w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσίας</w></foreign>, <ref type="lit">Jo. Chrys. In sanct. Jo. praecurs. L p. 803,54</ref> <foreign xml:lang="grc">δέχομαι τὸ βάπτισμα τοῦτο, ἵνα παράσχω τοῖς ἐμοῖς μαθηταῖς τῆς <w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσίας</w> τὸ βάπτισμα</foreign>, and also <ref type="lit">Theodoret. Interpr. in Ez. LXXXI p. 1184,17</ref> <foreign xml:lang="grc">ὕδωρ δε καθαρὸν τὸ τῆς <w lemma="παλιγγενεσία">παλιγγενεσίας</w> ὠνόμασεν ὕδωρ (λουτρόν π. = ὕδωρ π.</foreign>, cf. infra). In short, it is no coincidence that the “bath of regeneration” is mostly cited as a means, or end, to the attainment of salvation and deliverance from sins:</p>
                   
                    <list rend="bulleted">
                        
                    <item><emph><foreign xml:lang="grc">διὰ (τοῦ) λουτροῦ (τῆς) παλιγγενεσίας</foreign></emph> in <ref type="lit">Euseb. Comm. in Ps. XXIII pp. 276,3 Migne, 568,53, 1025,40, 1048,34, 1101,57 and 1361,36, Athanas. theol. Ep. ad quatt. Serp. XXVI pp. 537,21, Expos. in Ps. XXVII p. 161,18, Sanct. trinit. XXVIII p. 1229, Jo. Chrys. Ad illum. catech. XLIX p. 228,15, In princ. Act. LI p. 108,51, In Ge. LIII p. 374,6, Hom. de capto Eutr. LII p. 406,38, Expos. in Ps. LV p. 96,8, In Jo. LIX pp. 146,13 and 161,52, In ep. ad Galat. LXI p. 617,17, Cyr. Al. Ep. pasch. LXXVII p. 425,5, Expos. in Ps. LXIX pp. 865,35 and 1093,2, Theodoret. Interpr. in Ps. LXXX p. 1636,3, Procop. Gazien. In Cant. Canticorum p. 1605,41, Olympiod. Comm. in Eccles. XCIII p. 508,41, Comm. in Je. XCIII p. 693,29, Jo. Dam. Comm. in ep. Paul. XCV pp. 445,16 and 512,7, Enc. in sanct. Jo. Chrys. XCVI p. 769,23</ref>;</item>
                        
                        <item><emph>διὰ τῆς τοῦ λουτροῦ παλιγγενεσίας</emph> in <ref type="lit">Euseb. Comm. in Ps. p. 1332,37, Jo. Chrys. In ep. ad Rom. LX p. 541,57, [Jo. Chrys.] In Ps. LV p. 674,42, Theodoret. Interpr. in Ps. LXXX pp. 881,45, 1024,29, 1293,27, 1317,44, 1340,19, 1365,9, 1420,23, 1584,42, Interpr. in XII proph. min. LXXXI pp. 1568,5 and 1857,36, Interpr. in XIV ep. in sanct. Pauli LXXXII p. 96,18, Procop. Gazien. Comm. in Is. p. 2697,12, Olympiod. Comm. in Eccles. XCIII p. 588,37</ref>; </item>
                        
                        <item><emph><foreign xml:lang="grc">διὰ τῆς τοῦ ὕδατος παλιγγενεσίας</foreign></emph> in <ref type="lit">Theodoret. Interpr. in Ezechiel. LXXXI p. 821,19</ref> (see also <emph><foreign xml:lang="grc">ἐκ τοῦ ὕδατος τῆς παλιγγενεσίας</foreign></emph> in <ref type="lit">Jo. Chrys. Fragm. in Jb. LXIV p. 616,27</ref>);</item>
                        
                        <item><foreign xml:lang="grc"><emph>διὰ λουτροῦ παλιγγενεσίας καὶ ἀνακαινώσεως πνεύματος ἁγίου</emph></foreign> (from <ref type="lit">Tt. 3,5</ref>) in <ref type="lit">Euseb. Comm. in Ps. XXIII p. 217,20</ref>; <ref type="lit">Athanas. theol. Sanct. Trin. XXVIII p. 1234, Did. Caec. Trin. XXXIX p. 676,4, Bas. Caes. Adv. Eunom. XXIX p. 725,49, Jo. Chrys. Ad illum. catech. XLIX p. 225,44, In Jo. LIX p. 93,27, In ep. II ad Corinth. LXI p. 475,4, [Jo. Chrys.] In Ps. LV pp. 642,68 and 667,58, Theodoret. Interpr. in Ps. LXXX pp. 1688,40, 1740,11, 1808,37, Expl. in Cant. Canticorum LXXXI p. 137,15, Jo. Dam. Comm. in ep. Pauli XCV p. 733,30</ref>; see also <foreign xml:lang="grc"><emph>διὰ τοῦ πνευματικοῦ λουτροῦ τῆς παλιγγενεσίας</emph></foreign> in <ref type="lit">Hyppol. Comm. in Da. p. 382,24 Lef.</ref> (and <foreign xml:lang="grc"><emph>ἡ δὲ πνευματικὴ γέννησις ἡ διὰ τοῦ λουτροῦ τῆς παλιγγενεσίας</emph></foreign> in <ref type="lit">Olympiod. Comm. in Ec. XCIII p. 508,41</ref>); </item>
                        
                        <item><foreign xml:lang="grc"><emph>διὰ τὸ τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ παλιγγενεσίας μυστήριον, ἀναβιβάζει τὸν διὰ λουτροῦ γεγεννημένον</emph></foreign> in <ref type="lit">Euseb. Suppl. ad quaest. ad Steph. XII p. 960,13 (= Quaest. evang. ad Steph. p. 893,45)</ref>, <foreign xml:lang="grc"><emph>ἡ διὰ τοῦ θείου λουτροῦ … προσερχομένη· … ταύτην παλιγγενεσίαν καλοῦμεν</emph></foreign> in <ref type="lit">Athanas. theol. Vita sanct. synclet. XXVIII p. 1544,31</ref>;</item>
                        
                        <item><foreign xml:lang="grc"><emph>ἐν τῷ λουτρῷ τῆς παλιγγενεσίας</emph></foreign> in <ref type="lit">Euseb. Comm. in Ps. XXIII p. 276,34, Jo. Chrys. Expos. in Ps. LV p. 210,9, In ep. I ad Corinth. LXI p. 349,10</ref>;</item>
                        
                        <item><foreign xml:lang="grc"><emph>ἐπὶ (τῆς τοῦ) λουτροῦ παλιγγενεσίας</emph></foreign> in <ref type="lit">Euseb. Comm. in Ps. XXIII pp. 653,16 and 1377,21</ref>;</item>
                        
                        <item><foreign xml:lang="grc"><emph>ἐπὶ τῇ τοῦ λουτροῦ παλιγγενεσίᾳ</emph></foreign> in <ref type="lit">Bas. Caes. Adv. Eunom. XXIX p. 720,14</ref>;</item>
                        
                        <item><foreign xml:lang="grc"><emph>μετὰ τὸ λουτρὸν τῆς παλιγγενεσίας</emph></foreign> in <ref type="lit">Jo. Chrys. In Mt. LVII p. 280,52</ref>;</item>
                        
                        <item><foreign xml:lang="grc"><emph>πρὸ τῆς παλιγγενεσίας λουτροῦ</emph></foreign> in <ref type="lit">Euseb. Comm. in Ps. XXIV p. 29,23</ref>.</item>
                        
                    </list>
                    <p/>
                    <p>Below, other occurrences of <foreign xml:lang="grc">τὸ λουτρόν + (τῆς) παλιγγενεσίας</foreign> (in gen.):</p>
                    <list rend="bulleted">
                        
                        <item><foreign xml:lang="grc"><emph>(τὸ) λουτρὸν (τῆς) παλιγγενεσίας</emph></foreign> in <ref type="lit">Euseb. Comm. in Ps. XXIII p. 653,19 Migne, Athans. theol. In illud: qui dixerit verbum in filium XXVI p. 653,10, Sabbat et circumcis. XXVIII p. 141,1, Grag. Naz. In sanct. bapt. XXXVI p. 361,46, Jo. Chrys. Ad illum. catech. XLIX pp. 225,43 and 227,16, In illud: ne timueritis LV p. 517,26, In ep. ad Rom. LX p. 635,31, In ep. I ad Corinth. LXI p. 68,3, In ep. ad Hebr. LXIII p. 177,8, Fragm. in Jer LXIV p. 984,5., [Jo. Chrys.] In sec. dom. advent. LIX p. 623,52, Ecl. I-XLVIII LXIII p. 875,61, Olympiod. Comm. in Je. XCIII p. 721,53</ref>; <foreign xml:lang="grc"><emph>τὸ τῆς παλιγγενεσίας λουτρόν</emph></foreign> in <ref type="lit">Greg. Nyss. Iis qui bapt. diff. XLVI p. 429,33 and Enc. in martyr. p. 781,43</ref>; <foreign xml:lang="grc"><emph>τῆς τὸ λουτρὸν παλιγγενεσίας</emph></foreign> in <ref type="lit">Jo. Chrys. In ep. II ad Corinth. LXI pp. 402,52 and 404,17</ref>; <foreign xml:lang="grc"><emph>τὸ λουτρὸν κτίσμα λέγεται τὸ τῆς παλιγγενεσίας</emph></foreign> in <ref type="lit">[Jo. Chrys.] In illud: si qua in Christo nova creatura LXIV p. 30,48</ref>; <foreign xml:lang="grc"><emph>τὸ τῆς παλιγγενεσίας ὕδωρ</emph></foreign> in <ref type="lit">Theodoret. Interpr. in Ps. LXXX p. 1025,47</ref>;</item>
                        
                        <item><foreign xml:lang="grc"><emph>τοῦ λουτροῦ τῆς παλιγγενεσίας</emph></foreign> in <ref type="lit">Orig. In Je. 16,5,24 Klost, Procop. Gazien. In Cant. Canticorum p. 1697,6 M. (= Comm. in Is. p. 1853,2 M.), Olympiod. Comm. in Je. XCIII p. 657,33</ref>;</item>
                        
                        <item><foreign xml:lang="grc"><emph>(τῷ) λουτρῷ (τῆς) παλιγγενεσίας</emph></foreign> in [<ref type="lit">Jo. Chrys.] In illud: si qua in Christo nova creatura LXIV p. 33,22, Cyr. Al. Adorat. et cult. in spirit. et verit. LXVIII p. 448,52</ref>; <foreign xml:lang="grc"><emph>τῷ τῆς παλιγγενεσίας λουτρῷ</emph></foreign> in <ref type="lit">Cyr. Al. Glaphyr. in Pentateuch. LXIX p. 325,7</ref> (and see also <foreign xml:lang="grc"><emph>τῷ τῆς παλιγγενεσίας ὕδατι</emph></foreign> on <ref type="lit">p. 585,17</ref>);</item>
                        
                        <item><foreign xml:lang="grc"><emph>τῆς διὰ τοῦ λουτροῦ παλιγγενεσίας</emph></foreign> in <ref type="lit">Theodoret. Expl. in Cant. Canticorum LXXXI p. 105,37</ref>.</item>
                       
                    </list>
                    
                    <p/>
                </div>
                
                <div type="textpart" n="Bibliography">
                    <head>Bibliography</head>
                    <p/>
                    <p>The works of the Fathers of the Church and Christian authors are cited by J. P. Migne, <title>Patrologia cursus completus. Series Graeca</title>, I-CLXI, Paris 1856-1866. The entries from <title>ThGL</title> (VI 79f.) and the <title>Enciclopedia Filosofica</title>, (ed.) I. Ramelli, VIII (2006) 8247f., have been also consulted.</p>
                    <p/>
                    <p>Alesse 2000 = F. A., <title>La dottrina pitagorica della metempsicosi nel De anima di Aristotele</title>, in M. Tortorelli-A. Storchi Marino-A. Visconti (edd.), <title>Tra Orfeo e Pitagora. Origini e incontri di culture nell’antichità</title>. «Atti dei Seminari Napoletani 1996-1998», Napoli 2000, 397-412.</p>
                    <p>Baretta 2014 = M. B., <title>Filone, il De vita Mosis e le sue fonti</title>, «SCO» LX (2014) 73-97.</p>
                    <p>Burkert 1972 = W. B., <title>Lore and Science in Ancient Pythagoreanism</title>, Engl. transl. Cambridge, Mass. 1972 (or. ed. Stuttgart 1977).</p>
                    <p>Burnett 1984 = F.W. B., <title>Philo on immortality. A thematic study of Philo’s concept of παλιγγενεσία</title>, «CBQ» XLVI/3 (1984) 447-470.</p>
                    <p>Casadio 1991 = G. C., <title>La metempsicosi tra Orfeo e Pitagora</title>, in P. Borgeaud (ed.), <title>Orphisme et Orphée. En l’honneur de Jean Rudhardt</title>, Genève 1991, 119-155.</p>
                    <p>Cerri 1995 = G. C., <title>Cosmologia dell’Ade in Omero, Esiodo e Parmenide</title>, «PP» L/3-4 (1995) 437-467.</p>
                    
                    <p>Chantraine, DELG = P. C., <title>Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue grecque. Histoire des mots (avec un Supplément sous la direction de: Alain Blanc, Charles de Lamberterie, Jean-Louis Perpillou)</title>, Paris 19992 (19681).</p>
                    <p>Coscia 2017 = A. C., <title>L’antro sottoterra. Catabasi e riti di immortalizzazione da Pitagora ad Aristea di Proconneso</title>, in A. Maiuri (ed.), <title>Antrum. Riti e simbologie delle grotte nel Mediterraneo antico</title>, Brescia 2017, 127-172.</p>
                    <p>Dey 1937 = J. D., <title>Παλιγγενεσία. Ein Beitrag zur Klärung der religions-geshichtlichen Bedeutung von Tit 3,5</title>, Münster 1937.</p>
                    <p>Dillon 2010 = J. D., <title>I Medioplatonici. Uno studio sul Platonismo</title>, Milano 2010 (ed. or. Duckworth-London 19771, 19962).</p>
                    <p>Dodds 1951 = E.R. D., <title>The Greeks and the Irrational</title>, Berkley-Los Angeles 1951. </p>
                    <p>Fraenkel 1912 = D.M.E. F., <title>Zur Geschichte der Verbalnomina auf -σιο, -σια. Eine wortgeschichtliche Untersuchung</title>, in «Ztsch. vgl. Spr.» XLV (1912) 160-180.
                        Frisk, GEW = H. F., <title>Griechisches Etymologisches Wörterbuch</title>, Heidelberg 1960-1972.
                    </p>
                    <p>Gnilka 1991 = J. G., <title>Commentario teologico del Nuovo Testamento. Il Vangelo di Matteo</title>, I-II, trad. it. Brescia 1991 (or. ed. Freiburg im Breisgau 1988).</p>
                    <p>Iacono 1934 = V. I., <title>La παλιγγενεσία in S. Paolo e nell’ambiente pagano</title>, «Biblica» XV/2-3 (1934) 369-398.</p>
                    <p>Inglese-Santese 1999 = L. I-G. S., <title>Plutarco. Il cibarsi di carne</title>, Napoli 1999.</p>
                    <p>Leisegang 1949 = H. L., <title>Palingenesia</title>, in <title>RE</title> XVIII3 (1949) 139-148.</p>
                    <p>Lévy 1926 = I. L., <title>Recherches sur les sources de la légende de Pythagore</title>, Leroux 1926.</p>
                    <p>Neri 2018 = C. N.(-G. Alvoni-R. Batisti-M. Olivieri), <title>Methodos</title>, Firenze 2018.</p>
                    <p>Oberlinner 1999 = L. O., <title>Commento teologico del Nuovo Testamento. Le lettere pastorali, III. La lettera a Tito</title>, Brescia 1999 (or. ed. Freiburg im Breisgau 1996).</p>
                    <p>Pellizzari 2003 = A. P., <title>Servio. Storia, cultura e istituzioni nell’opera di un grammatico tardoantico</title>, Firenze 2003.</p>
                    <p>Pohlenz 1967 = M. P., <title>La Stoa. Storia di un movimento spirituale</title>, I-II, trad. it. Firenze 1967 (or. ed. Göttingen 1959).</p>
                    
                    
                    <p>Reale 1994 = G. R., <title>Saggio introduttivo L’itinerario a Dio in Filone di Alessandrino, in Filone. L’erede delle cose divine</title>, Milano 1994, 5-60.</p>
                    <p> Reale-Radice 2011 = G. R-R. R., <title>La genesi e la natura della filosofia mosaica</title>, in <title>Filone di Alessandria. Tutti i trattati del Commentario allegorico alla Bibbia</title>, Milano 20112 (20051), XV-CXI.                    </p>
                    <p>Riedweg 2007 = C. R., <title>Pitagora. Vita, dottrina e influenza</title>, trad. it. Milano 2007 (or. ed. München 2002).</p>
                    <p>Schibli 1990 = H.S. S., <title>Pherekydes of Syros</title>, Oxford 19902 (19831).</p>
                    <p> Tortorelli Ghidini 2006 = M. T.G., <title>Figli della terra e del cielo stellato. Testi orfici con traduzione e commento</title>, Napoli 2006. </p>
                    <p>Tsekourakis 1987 = D. T., <title>Pythagoreanism or platonism and ancient medicine? The reasons for vegetarianism in Plutarch’s Moralia</title>, in «Philosophie, Wissenschaften, Technik. Philosophie (Historische Einleitung; Platonismus)» XXXVI/1 (1987) 366-393.</p>
                    <p>Vegetti 1994 = M. V., <title>L’etica degli antichi</title>, Roma-Bari 1994.</p>
                    <p>Viscardi 2014 = G.P. V., <title>Erro lungo la casa dall’ampia porta di Hades. Configurazioni mitiche dello spazio oltremondano nella rappresentazione greca: il cosmo di Hades come luogo di negoziazione di significati</title>, «SMSR» LXXX/1 (2014) 135-157.</p>
                    <p>West 1993 = M.L. W., <title>Early Greek Philosophy and the Orient</title>, Oxford 1971.</p>
                    <p>White 2001 = S.A. W., <title>Principes Sapientiae: Dicaearchus’ biography of philosophy</title>, in W.W. Fortenbaugh-E. Schütrumpf (edd.), <title>Dicaearchus of Messana. Text, Translation and Discussion</title>, London-New York 2001.</p>
                    <p>Zhmud 2012 = L. Z., <title>Pythagoras and the Pythagoreans</title>, Engl. transl. Oxford 2012 (ed. or. St. Petersburg 1994).</p>
                    <p/>
                </div>
                
                
                
            </div>
            
        </body>
    </text>
</TEI>
