Philo categorizes and interprets various dreams from Genesis inDe somniis1–2. At the beginning of the treatises, Philo refers to a three–fold dream classification system that he used to organize the dreams and explains that he devoted one treatise to each category.¹ The treatise that included his exegesis of the first class of dreams is no longer extant. The treatise now referred to asDe somniis1 deals exclusively with the second class of dreams and includes the two dreams of Jacob.De somniis2 deals with the third class of dreams and includes the two dreams...

Since Richard Baer’s 1970 monograph on Philo’s usage of “male” and “female” categories, scholars have attempted to comprehend Philo’s portrayal of women and his usage of masculine and feminine terminology to represent the intellectual and sensual faculties of the human soul. Particularly troubling in this regard has been Philo’s descriptions of “spiritual childbearing”—that process by which the male philosopher allegorically assumes the role of a “virgin” woman in order to produce the spiritual offspring (i.e., wisdom) of God—for the image contains a positive adoption of feminine imagery that seems somewhat at odds with the overwhelming negative portrayal of...

EnLois spéciales1.45, Philon d’Alexandrie présente les puissances divines comme δορυφόροι, « porte-lances », « escortes ». Dans la reformulation de l’Alexandrin, Moïse dit en effet à Dieu :

ἱκετεύω δὲ τὴν γου̑ν περὶ σὲ δόξαν θεάσασθαι· δόξαν δὲ σὴν εἰ̑ναι νομίζω τὰς περὶ σὲ δορυφορούσας δυνάμεις, ὡ̑ν διαφεύγουσα ἡ κατάληψις ἄχρι του̑ παρόντος οὐ μικρὸν ἐνεργάζεταί μοι πόθον τη̑ς διαγνώσεως.

« Je te supplie de me laisser au moins contempler la gloire qui t’entoure; je tiens pour ta gloire les puissances qui font escorte autour de toi, dont la saisie, qui m’échappe jusqu’à présent, ne suscite pas en moi un...

In Philo’s treatiseDe Animalibus, preserved only in Armenian, we find this quote at §47, presented here in the translation by Abraham Terian:¹

As the poets say,

We’re thought to be of seed divine

And of kinship closely akin.

But when enslaved by food and drink,

Such lowly things do make us fall

From heav’n above to earth beneath.²

Terian states that,

The verse, with its ascription to the “poets” (as also inQuaes ExII 6) and subject matter as well, is reminiscent of the so-called Orphic poems. The concept of human devolution from the divine has its origin...

The extent of Philo’s influence on the development of thought has ranged from those who considered him an isolated elite who moved within a very limited circle¹ to those who have thought that he was an architect for the basic structure of Western thought in the medieval period.² Neither extreme has support among contemporary Philonic specialists who have worked to situate him in a broader context.

The efforts have taken three different approaches. The Alexandrian Jewish exegete’s three series of commentaries preserve the largest single corpus of Jewish exegesis from the Second Temple period. One approach has been to explore...

The short answer to the question posed in the title is, I suggest, “no.” But of course such an answer requires justification, and it is to that justification that this paper is devoted. But let me be clear that I hesitate to present this answer and its justification as anything more than suggestions. The life and literary activity of Philo of Alexandria are for the most part hidden in mystery, and the means by which his works survived in the first and second centuries c.e. are unknown. It would thus be foolhardy to be confident about much that will be...

There is a curious phenomenon in the writings of the two most prolific Jewish authors of the first century c.e.: both Philo and Josephus openly cited non-Jewish sources but failed to name Jewish predecessors. We know that they had Jewish predecessors and used them. Philo was not only indebted to some known Jewish authors such as Ezekiel the Tragedian but to a tradition of exegesis that included allegorists and literalists. Yet he never named any of his Jewish predecessors or contemporaries. On the other hand, he cited a range of Greek literary authors¹ by name such as Homer,² Aeschyhlus,³ Sophocles,⁴...

In a well-known article, David T. Runia asks, “Why Does Clement Call Philo ‘the Pythagorean’?”¹ Runia finds the epithet curious, expecting that Clement would instead refer to Philo as a Jew or, more likely, a Hebrew, as his Christian successors did.² Runia begins his investigation by noting that in one of the two passages in which Clement identifies Philo as a Pythagorean, he also employs another curious epithet in reference to a Jewish source, calling Aristobulus “the Peripatetic.”³ Runia argues that since neither Philo nor Aristobulus can be shown to belong officially to either school, the epithets signal not school...

The purpose of this index is to provide some indication of the non–biblical sources that Philo quotes or alludes to in his works. Those references that are explicit quotations of the source are marked by an asterisk (*), while the majority are more subtle allusions or echoes. The index is reasonably complete as a record of quotations, though its reckoning of allusions could doubtless be significantly expanded. The difference between a quotation, an allusion, and an echo is, of course, a matter of ongoing debate in current discussion. I have operated on the basis of a generous conception of...