Philo of Alexandria - Books and Journals

critical studies 2001 171
The article is a treatment of Ambrose, Ep. 55, in which he addresses a problem
that had long troubled educated readers of the Greek and Latin Bible, but came
especially to the fore during the pagan-Christian cultural rivalries of the fourth
century. The problem was that the biblical authors did not appear to have written
their works according to principles of literary art involving rules of composition
and style. In defence Ambrose puts forward the assertion that the requisites
of art are in fact indicated in the biblical text. In formulating this claim he
relies heavily on a section of Philo’s treatise Fug. 132–136. However, in this
passage Philo is not concerned with the issue of art in the Bible. Nevertheless,
although Ambrose does remove the Philonic passage from its original context,
in his own way he does return to that context. Suggestions are made as to
why Ambrose took the passage in the direction that he does. These reasons
have as much to do with changes in the general philosophical and religious
environment in the period between the two authors as they do with specifically
Christian as opposed to Jewish approaches to the divine text. (1) The tendency
to concretize the abstract divine word as the written text of Scripture is a
general post-Philonic development in both Judaism and Christianity. (2) The
manner in which Ambrose interprets the three-fold scheme of Fug. 133 is
probably due to a late Platonic (rather than Stoic) orientation towards the
concepts involved. On the other hand (1) the assumption that the ram of
Gen 22 typifies the Christ/Logos is based on a Christian reading of the text,
and (2) the identification of the Christ/Logos with the ‘inscripted’ logos is
derived from Alexandrian Christian theology. However, the identification of
the λγς with the πτέλεσμα of the text is based on a tighter application of
Philo’s allegorization to the actual wording of the text. The implications of this
identification as refined by Ambrose, although seemingly alien to the apparent
context at the beginning of the letter, move in a thoroughly Philonic direction.
(DTR; based on author’s summary)
20135. A.Kasher[ ], ‘
-’ [‘The Question of Equal Civic Rights for the Jews of
Hellenistic-Roman Diaspora’] in I. Gafni (ed.), Kehal Yisrael: Jewish Self-
Rule through the Ages, Volume One: the Ancient Period (Jerusalem 2001)
55–73.
The article presents a convenient summary statement of the author’s ongoing
research (see especially R-R 8527) into the legal status and rights of the Jewish
population of the Hellenistic-Roman Diaspora. With a primary dependence on
the testimony of Josephus, reinforced by references to Philo’s historical works,
Kasher argues that the Jews of Alexandria constituted a πλίτευμα,withtheright
to practice their own customs and to participate in the general civic rights of all
those classified as citizens. (DS)
20136.U.Kellerman,‘DerDekalogindenSchriftendesFrühjudentums:
ein Überblick,’ in H. Graf Reventlow (ed.), Weisheit, Ethos und