Philo of Alexandria - Books and Journals

244 part two
Octava. Origen and the Alexandrian Tradition, Bibliotheca Ephemeridum
Theologicarum Lovaniensium 164 (Leuven 2003) 223–232.
Some of Origen’s statements about the unknowability and unattainability
of God are derived from the Platonic analogy between the Good and the
sun in the image of the Cave. Taking as its starting point an article by John
Dillon on Origen’s use of the imagery of light in the De principiis, thepaper
attempts to discover whether any aspects of his reading can be traced back
to Philo. The theme of the brightness of the Good which makes the objects
of knowledge knowable and consequently dazzles whoever wishes to achieve
the contemplation of the source of knowability is derived from the Platonist
tradition which emphasizes the impossibility of obtaining knowledge of the
first Principle. The interpretation of the sun analogy and the dimming of sight
through the brightness of the incorporeal rays is present in Philo when he affirms
that the ‘One who is’ is unknowable. From Him, like from the sun, blinding
rays of light stream forth which make vision impossible. Just as He is ρρητς,
κατάληπτς and περινητς, soheisalsoρατς. His essence cannot
be known. He can only be seen ‘from a distance’ (cf. Somn. 1.67).Butatthe
same time God is the creator of intelligible light which gives sensible objects
their power of illumination. Unlike Plato Philo makes a distinction between
the source of light and the rays that shine forth. The latter are equated with
the divine Powers, but even they blind the viewer. Origen also accepts the
distinction, but the rays are associated with the Son, who deprives himself of
equality with the Father in order to show humankind the path of knowledge.
(RR)
20328. F. Calabi, ‘Theatrical Language in Philo’s In Flaccum,’ in F.
Calabi (ed.), Italian Studies on Philo of Alexandria, Studies in Philo of
Alexandria and Mediterranean Antiquity 1 (Boston 2003) 91–116.
Translation and elaboration of an article that originally appeared in Italian;
see the above 20217. The present article includes a brief examination of theatrical
metaphors in the Legat. This treatise, when compared with the Flacc., stresses
the moral reprobation of simulation, deceit and giving in to emotions. (HMK)
20329. A. Carriker, The Library of Eusebius, Supplements to Vigiliae
Christianae 67 (Leiden 2003), esp. 164–177.
Published version of the author’s Columbia Ph.D. thesis (see above 9914).
The passage specifically on Philo first discusses the catalogue of his works which
Eusebius gives in HE 2.18. Further discussion is devoted to two works that
are missing, Opif.and Mos. The former was definitely present in his library,
the latter was most likely present as well. It is unclear why they are not mentioned.
The section finishes with some general comments on Philo’s presence
in the library, namely that it is incomplete, that it contains quite a few works
which Eusebius never cites, that is was organized in rolls (about which no
clear conclusions can be reached), and that the books reached Caesarea via