Philo of Alexandria - Books and Journals

critical studies 2004 287
that the thesis is based on successive assimilations of the Essenes to the Therapeutae,
and then to the Pythagoreans. (JR)
20407. M. A. Beavis, ‘Philo’s Therapeutae: Philosopher’s Dream or
Utopian Construction,’ Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 14
(2004) 30–42.
Contrary to the argument in Engberg-Pedersen’s 1999 article (see above
9922) that Philo’s Contempl.is a fictional account of the ideal society, Philo’s presentation
points to the historical reality of the Egyptian-Jewish contemplatives.
This article shows how Philo’s description of the Therapeutae resembles Hellenistic
utopian conventions, particularly Iambulus’ account of the Islands of the
Sun (Diodorus Siculus 2.55–59). The differences between the Heliopolitans and
the Therapeutae are due to realization that the latter are an actual community of
ascetics known to Philo (Contempl. 1). (KAF)
20408. R.Bees,Die Oikeiosislehre der Stoa. I Rekonstruktion ihres
Inhalts, Epistemata: Würzburger Wissenschaftliche Schriften 258 (Würzburg
2004), esp. 77–84.
In this monograph on the doctrine of κείωσις in the Stoa, the author
examines as a source Philo’s Anim., in which Philo investigates the question
whether animals have reason or not. The German scholar Karl Reinhardt had
claimed that the passage, in which it is argued with Stoic arguments that animals
do not have reason, is heavily influenced by Posidonius. This view is refuted by
Bees, who concludes that the work cannot be regarded as having been influenced
by Posidonius. (ACG)
20409. K.Berthelot,L’«humanité de l’autre homme» dans la pensée
juive ancienne, Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 87
(Leiden 2004), esp. 107–151, 231–239.
The study analyzes how humanism was conceived of in different philosophical
schools during the Hellenistic and early Roman period, and how these ideas
were debated in ancient Jewish thought. The term humanism (‘l’ humanité’)
refers to the idea that every person has duties towards his/her fellow human
beings,forthesolereasonthattheyallshareacommonnatureorarebound
by a form of kinship. The book also tries to determine to what extent Gen
1:26–27 (creation of human beings in God’s image) and Lev 19:18 (the commandment
to love one’s neighbour, who is like oneself) could be interpreted
in a humanistic way by ancient Jewish writers. Two sections of the book are
specifically devoted to Philo’s thought on the question. It is too simple to say
that Philo explicates Jewish ethical ideas by means of Greek philosophical language.
Often he subverts these concepts and gives them an entirely different
connotation. In particular the author examines the concepts of κινωνία, κείωσις,
συγγένεια and μίωσις, with particular emphasis on the exegesis of