Philo of Alexandria - Books and Journals

322 part two
between God the creator and his creation are central. Restricting the scope of his
enquiry, Pavone concentrates his analysis on the term τ παητν in Opif.8–9,
where the order of the universe is reduced to the two factors of the active and
the passive cause. The term itself can be taken in two different ways: either as
‘pre-existent passive’ or as ‘non-pre-existent’. In the second meaning the account
of creation in Opif. would not be incompatible with a form of creatio ex nihilo.
The doctrine of the simultaneity of the divine creative process also presses in this
direction, as well as that of its unicity, in which the παητν would fulfil a double
role: it would indicate the potentiality for divine creation, and at the same time
it would prefigure ‘the final result of the divine activity’, i.e. the cosmos (p. 137).
These two realities, potential and actual, do not contradict each other, but are
‘the two sides of the same medallion’ (ibid.). (RR)
20494. S. Pearce, ‘Jerusalem as ‘Mother-city’ in the Writings of Philo
of Alexandria,’ in J. M. G. Barclay (ed.), Negotiating Diaspora. Jewish
Strategies in the Roman Empire, Library of Second Temple Studies 45
(London 2004) 19–36.
ThisessayexploreswhatPhilointendedbyapplyingthelanguageofμητρπλις
(‘mother-city’) and πικία (‘colony’) to the relationship between Jerusalem
and Jews. Pearce rejects the assertion, made by Kasher (RR 8527) and Niehoff
(see 20150), that Diaspora Jews saw Jerusalem as their true homeland and the
place to which they owed greatest allegiance. While devotion to the Jerusalem
temple was central to Philo, an exegesis of Flacc.46 and Legat. 281–284 against
the broader contours of Philo’s thought shows that Philo did not claim the centrality
of Jerusalem over other homelands and Alexandria in particular. Rather,
Philo’s language is influenced by the Greek Bible and his Pentateuch-centric
piety. (KAF)
20495. S.Pearce,‘KingMoses:NotesonPhilo’sPortraitofMosesas
an Ideal Leader in the Life of Moses,’ in E. Gannagé et al. (edd.),The
Greek Strand in Islamic Political Thought: Proceedings of the Conference
held at the Institute of Advanced Study, Princeton, 16–27 June 2003,
Mélanges de l’Université Saint-Josephe Beirut 57 (Beirut 2004) 37–74.
The theme of conference for which this contribution was prepared was the
Greek and Christian roots of the Islamic tradition of the ideal and virtuous
ruler. The paper focuses on the work that was perhaps the most important
influence on early Christian models of ideal rule, Philo’s Mos. It commences with
some general considerations on how Philo presents Moses, followed by some
comments on the work itself and its place in the Philonic corpus. It is argued
that the work was most likely originally independent of the Exposition of the
Law, but that there is a clear association with the latter series, as indicated by
internal cross-references. The remainder of the article consists of a fairly literal
translation followed by extensive comments on the following passages: Mos.1.1–
2, 8, 20–24, 25–29, 32, 48, 148–162, 243, 249, 2.1–20. (DTR)