Philo of Alexandria - Books and Journals

294 part two
identity, central to which was the Greek translation of the Bible. Both writers
emphasize the openness of Jewish culture to the outside world and the compatibility
of Jewish and Greek intellectual traditions. Jewish sources sometimes
reflect the influence of contemporary Greek philosophers and exegetes, but we
have little evidence of who these figures were. Despite signs that Jews felt at home
in Alexandria, Philo also reveals a sense of alienation from the culture, especially
when he discusses proselytes, aspects of Alexandrian life, and the violent uprising
against the Jews. Other Jewish works too suggest that not all Jews felt at home
in Alexandria and some pagan writers express hostility toward the Jews. Alexandrian
Christians maintained continuities with earlier Jews through their shared
Greek Bible, biblical exegesis, and interactions with Greek intellectual tradition.
Nonetheless Christians rejected Jewish practices and focused on a broader range
of biblical books. Despite impressions of cultural interaction and openness, both
Jewish and Christian sources convey a sense of hostility in Alexandria between
Jews and pagans, Christians and pagans, and later Jews and Christians. (EB)
20424. N.G.Cohen,‘TheMysteryTerminologyinPhilo,’inR.
Deines and K.-W. Niebuhr (edd.), Philo und das Neue Testament: Wechselseitige
Wahrnehmungen. 1. Internationales Symposium zum Corpus
Judaeo-Hellenisticum Novi Testamenti (Eisenach/Jena, Mai 2003), Wissenschaftliche
Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 172 (Tübingen
2004) 173–187.
The article gives a preliminary analysis of Philo’s mystery terminology, concentrating
primarily on the term μυστήριν and related words. First a number of
unspecific usages are examined, including those which refer to the knowledge of
God and the Torah as ‘mysteries’. Then a larger group of passages are analyzed in
which ‘mystery terminology’ is used in the context of philosophical allegorization
of the biblical text, including those in which reference is made to the process
of (attempting) to gain knowledge of God. The author concludes that there can
be no question of any kind of ‘mystery religion’. Philo uses this kind of terminology
metaphorically. He does not have in mind any kind of secret esoteric lore,
but he is keen to avoid criticism from fundamentalist–literalists. For him the
‘Great Jewish Mysteries’ are God’s absolute unity and incorporeality, combining
Judaism and Platonism. The article concludes with some remarks on what can
be said about Philo’s ‘mystical experience’. (DTR)
20425. F.ContiBizzarro,‘Nell’officinadiPolluce,’inG.Abbamonte,
F. Conti Bizzarro and L. Spina (edd.), L’ultima parola: l’analisi
dei testi: teorie e pratiche nell’antichità greca e latina: atti del terzo colloquio
italo-francese coordinato da Luigi Spina e Laurent Pernot, Napoli 13–15
marzo 2003 (Naples 2004) 75–83.
Analysis of two paragraphs (1.40–41) from the Onomasticon of Pollux (2nd
century c.e.), which list terms of praise suitable to be used with reference to a