Philo of Alexandria - Books and Journals

critical studies 2000 153
Alexandrian population of Hellenes, Egyptians, and Jews was more complex
than the Casesarean population of Jews and non-Jews. She then summarizes
details of the Alexandrian ethnic conflict of 38 c.e. and examines the complicated
issue of σπλιτεία, equality of civil rights. With very few exceptions,
which included Philo and his brother Alexander, Jews were not citizens of
Alexandria. They had a πλίτευμα, whoseauthorityisnotclear,anddiscussions
of σπλιτεία may reflect Jewish membership in the πλίτευμα rather
than citizenship in Alexandria. As a source of information about Jewish-Gentile
relations in Alexandria, Philo represents a narrow, elitist point of view. Philonic
studies would thus do well to embrace social scientific approaches, which would
provide a broader, more inclusive picture of all classes of society. (EB)
20071. J.F.M.Smit,‘‘YoushallnotMuzzleaThreshingOx’:Paul’s
UseoftheLawofMosesin1Cor.9,8–12,’Estudios Bíblicos 58 (2000)
239–263, esp. 254–256, 262–263.
In this article it is argued that Paul appends to the saying ‘You shall not
muzzle a threshing ox’ (Deut 25:4), which he quotes in 1Cor 9:9, an explanation
in which he enlarges the scope of this rule in view of himself and Barnabas
as founders of the Corinthian church. Philo (Virt. 145–146), Josephus and
the Mishnah treat this biblical law in ways similar to Paul, but, whereas their
interpretation intends to enhance Jewish identity, Paul’s interpretation exhibits a
definitely ecclesiological character and ultimately intends to enhance the identity
of the church in Corinth as the exclusive community of the one Lord. (HMK;
based on the author’s abstract)
20072.H.G.Snyder,Teachers and Texts in the Ancient World: Philosophers,
Jews and Christians (London–New York 2000), esp. 123–136.
Snyder studies the function and use of texts in the following ‘book-centered
groups’ in antiquity: Stoics, Epicureans, Aristotelians, Platonists, Philo (for lack
of evidence, the author could not discuss Hellenistic Jews as a group), Qumran,
JudaisminPalestine,andChristians.Onthebasisofananalysisoftheformal
characteristics of Philo’s Allegorical Commentaries and Quaestiones, Snyder
attempts to draw conclusions about their origin and use. Passages with an
autobiographical tone like Cher. 49andAbr. 23, contribute to the conclusion
that ‘by writing, Philo served his own devotional needs, in so far as reading and
reflecting on scripture placed him at the feet of Moses and Jeremiah. No doubt he
hoped that his own writings would do the same for others’ (p. 136). Philo ‘creates
a ‘virtual classroom’ by means of written text’ (p. 137). Reviews: K. A. Fox, SPhA
14 (2002) 226–228. (HMK)
20073. E. Starobinski-Safran, ‘Philon von Alexandrien über Krieg
und Frieden,’ in W. Stegmaier (ed.), Die philosophische Aktualität der
jüdischen Tradition (Frankfurt am Main 2000) 133–149.