002: Foreword
FOREWORD AN by David M. Scholer
Philo, usually known as Philo the Jew (Philo Judaeus) or Philo of Alexandria (a city in Egypt with a large Jewish Diaspora population in Greco-Roman times), lived from about20 B.C. to about A.D. 50. He is one of the most important Jewish authors of the Second Temple period of Judaism and was a contemporary of both Jesus and Paul. Yet, Philo is not nearly as well known or as frequently read as the first century A.D. Jewish historian Josephus.
Part of the reason for the relative neglect of Philo has had to do with the general unavailability of a convenient English translation of Philo, such as exists for Josephus in the frequently reprinted one-volume translation of William Whiston (originally 1736; for an excellent modern printing of this translation which utilizes the current scholarly numbering system for Josephus’writings, see The Works of Josephus: Complete and Unabridged[Trans. William Whiston; new updated edition; Peabody: Hendrickson, 1987]).
Philo wrote in Greek, and most of his writings survive in Greek, but a few have survived only in ancient Armenian translations. Only two complete English translations of Philo have ever been published. The most authoritative one, which is still in print, is the twelve-volume edition in the Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press/London: William Heinemann, 1929-1953). The Loeb edition includes the Greek text of Philo (except for the few writings for which there is no extant Greek text) along with an English translation, as well as introductions, notes, and indexes (the Loeb text is based on the standard major edition of the Greek text of Philo by L. Cohn and P. Wendland, Philonis Alexandrini opera quae supersunt[7 vols. In 8; Berlin, 1896-1930; reprinted Berlin, 1962]). The edition was the work of F. H. Colson and G. H. Whitaker for the first ten volumes; the two additional volumes containing works of Philo available only in an Armenian version were prepared by Ralph Marcus. Because of its size, the presence of the Greek text, and its relatively high cost, this edition has not usually been purchased and used by the “average”Jewish or Christian student or rabbi and pastor and not even by many scholars and professors who might well make more use of Philo. The only other English translation of Philo was the work of Charles Duke Yonge (1812-1891), which appeared in 1854-1855 in four volumes in Bohn’s Ecclesiastical Library (The Works of Philo Judaeus, the Contemporary of Josephus, Translated from the Greek [London: Henry G. Bohn]). Yonge was educated in classics at St. Mary Hall, Oxford. From 1866until his death he was professor of modern history and English literature at Queen’s College, Belfast He published over thirty-five works of his own on a wide range of subjects and also translated numerous writings from antiquity for the various Bohn’s publications, including this translation of Philo. Yonge’s translation has long been out of print and is quite scarce. It is this translation that is published here. It is, however, now in one volume, completely reset in modern easy to read type, keyed to the standard numbering system used in the Loeb Classical Library edition, and supplemented with adequate notes and with new translations of sections not included in Yonge’s original edition now inserted at the appropriate places. It is hoped that this presentation of Philo will encourage much greater and more broadly based reading, study, and use of Philo. This introduction offers suggestions for going beyond this volume to learn more about Philo and his significance for ancient Judaism, early Christianity, and Greek philosophy.
Relatively little is known about Philo’s life. He lived his entire life in Alexandria, Egypt, the location of the single largest Jewish community outside of Palestine in this period (the Jewish population of Alexandria was perhaps one million people). Philo came from a prominent and wealthy family, was well educated, and was a leader within the Alexandrian Jewish community. So far as is known, Philo visited the temple in Jerusalem only once in his lifetime (On Providence 2.64).
Philo was involved in the crisis in his community related to the pogrom initiated in A D.38 by the prefect. Flaccus, during the reign of the Roman emperor, Gaius Caligula. Philo was selected to head the Jewish delegation that went to Rome to see Gaius Caligula. Philo’s account of these events is found in his two writings Flaccus (In Flaccum) and The Embassy to Gaius (De Legatione ad Gaium-for details on these events and writings, as well as all other facets of Philo’s life and literary production, see the books and articles recommended near the conclusion of this introduction).
Philo’s brother, Alexander, held various offices for Rome in Egvpt and used his money to plate the gates of the temple in Jerusalem with silver and gold and to make a loan to Herod Agrippa I (see Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 18.159-160; Jewish War5.205). Alexander’s two sons, Marcus and Tiberius Iuius Alexander, Philo’s nephews, were also involved in Roman affairs. Marcus married Bernice, the daughter of Herod Agrippa I dosephus, Jewish Antiquities 19.276-277; this is the Bernice mentioned in [Acts 25:13; Acts 25:23; Acts 26:30] ). Tiberius Alexander became an apostate from Judaism, held the office of procurator of Judaea (A.D. 46-48), and was a prefect in Egvpt (A.D. 66-70). In at least one important passage Philo reveals something of his perspective on his life and work (On the Special Laws 3.1-6). Here Philo remembers that “There was once a time when, devoting my leisure to philosophy and to the contemplation of the world and the things in it, I reaped the fruit of excellent, and desirable, and blessed intellectual feelings....I appeared to be raised on high and borne aloft by a certain inspiration of the soul....”But this life was interrupted with “... The vast sea of the cares of public politics, in which I was and still am tossed about without being able to keep myself swimming at the top.”But all was not lost, for “... Even in these circumstances I ought to give thanks to God, that though I am so overwhelmed by this flood, I am not wholly sunk and swallowed up in the depths. But I open the eyes of my soul ... And I am irradiated with the light of wisdom.... Behold, therefore, I venture not only to study the sacred commands of Moses, but also with an ardent love of knowledge to investigate each separate one of them, and to endeavour to reveal and to explain to those who wish to understand them, things concerning them which are not known to the multitude.”
It is this concern to reveal what is not generally known about the writings of Moses that permeates most of Philo’s literary output (see the table below for full titles and abbreviations). Many of Philo’s writings paraphrase the biblical texts of Moses; in these Philo expands the text, giving his own views on various matters. These writings include: On Abraham, On the Decalogue, On Joseph, Moses, On the Creation, On Rewards and Punishments, On the Special Laws and On the Virtues. Most of his other writings are allegorical commentaries on [Gen 2:1-25; Gen 3:1-24; Gen 4:1-26; Gen 5:1-32; Gen 6:1-22; Gen 7:1-24; Gen 8:1-22; Gen 9:1-29; Gen 10:1-32; Gen 11:1-32; Gen 12:1-20; Gen 13:1-18; Gen 14:1-24; Gen 15:1-21; Gen 16:1-16; Gen 17:1-27; Gen 18:1-33; Gen 19:1-38; Gen 20:1-18; Gen 21:1-34; Gen 22:1-24; Gen 23:1-20; Gen 24:1-67; Gen 25:1-34; Gen 26:1-35; Gen 27:1-46; Gen 28:1-22; Gen 29:1-35; Gen 30:1-43; Gen 31:1-55; Gen 32:1-32; Gen 33:1-20; Gen 34:1-31; Gen 35:1-29; Gen 36:1-43; Gen 37:1-36; Gen 38:1-30; Gen 39:1-23; Gen 40:1-23 w:1-23; Gen 41:1-57] ; On Husbandry, On the Cherubim, On the Confusion of Tongues, On the Preliminary Studies, The Worse Attacks the Better, On Drunkenness, On Flight and Finding, On the Giants, Allegorical Interpretation, On the Migration of Abraham, On the Change of Names, On Noah’s Work as a Planter, On the Posterity and Exile of Cain, Who is the Heir, On the Unchangeableness of God, On the Sacrifices of Abel and Cain, On Sobriety and On Dreams. Also in this general category are his exegetical Questions and Answers on Genesis and Questions and Answers on Exodus.
Philo’s remaining writings are usually placed into two categories. The philosophical writings include: On the Eternity of the World, On the Animals (see p. xvi below), On Providenceand Every Good Man Is Free. The historical-apologetic writings include: Flaccus, Hypothetica, On the Embassy to Gaius, and On the Contemplative Life. Even these writings, however, relate to Philo’s concerns as an exegete of the Pentateuch of Moses.
Philo’s concern to interpret Moses shows constantly both his deep devotion and commitment to his Jewish heritage, beliefs, and community, and also reflects his unabashed use of philosophical categories and traditions “to investigate each separate one of them [Moses’commands], and to endeavour to reveal and to explain to those who wish to understand them, things concerning them which are not known to the multitude”(On the Special Laws 3.6). The scholarly discussion over whether Philo is primarily Jewish or Greek is actually misguided. In Philo’s time much of Judaism was significantly Hellenized. Philo’s commitment to and passion for the law of Moses was genuine and controlling. Philo, too, drank deeply at the philosophical well of the Platonic tradition and saw it as strengthening and deepening his understanding of the God of Moses. Philo probably represents Middle Platonism (the Platonic tradition between Plato’s immediate successors and the rise of third century A D. Neoplatonism), although some scholars debate this classification.
Because of Philo’s participation in Middle Platonism and Hellenistic philosophical traditions, he is important for the study of Hellenistic philosophy. Philo also participated in the allegorical interpretive traditions, developed and used in Alexandria for understanding Homer and other Greek traditions, characteristic of his Hellenistic culture. Allegorical interpretation became a deep part of Philo’s exegetical and hermeneutical understanding of the law of Moses. Philo has sometimes been labeled a gnostic or participant in gnosticism, but this is a misunderstanding of his Platonism in service to his interpretation of the Mosaic law (see especially Birger AX Pearson, “Philo and Gnosticism,”Aufstieg und Niedergang in der römischenWelt 2 21,1 [Ed. W. Haase; Berlin/New York: de Gruyter], pp. 295-342).
Philo is significant for the understanding of first century A D. Hellenistic Judaism. He is the main surviving literary figure of the Hellenized Judaism of the Second Temple period of ancient Judaism. Philo is critical for understanding many of the currents, themes, and interpretive traditions which existed in Diaspora and Hellenistic Judaism. Philo confirms the multifaceted character of Second Temple Judaism; it was certainly not a monolithic phenomenon. Judaism, in spite of its concerns for purity and ethnic identity with reference to the law of Moses, also found considerable freedom to participate in many aspects of Hellenistic culture, as Philo so clearly evidences.
Philo is also noteworthy for understanding the early church and the writings of the New Testament, especially those of Paul, John, and Hebrews. It is sometimes forgotten that the New Testament documents were written in Greek by authors who were Jews (of course now committed to understanding Jesus as Christ and Lord) who were part of the Hellenistic culture of the Greco-Roman world. Most of the early churches reflected and described in the New Testament were part of the social fabric of the Hellenistic Greco-Roman world. Precisely because Philo is a Hellenistic Jew, he is essential for New Testament studies. The Christian church has been the primary preserver of the writings of Philo, who was virtually unknown in the Jewish tradition after his own time until the sixteenth century A.D.(presumably the Christian attachment to Philo grew out of, at least in part, Eusebius’[Ca. A.D. 26s339] belief that the Jewish group described in the Contemplative Life, the Therapeutae, was a Christian group).
Philo’s discussions of circumcision, clearly perceived within Judaism at this time as a critical identity factor, may serve both to illustrate the tensions with Philo’s Jewish and Greek contexts and also to provide background to the debate about circumcision in the early church(e.g., [Acts 15:1-2] ; Galatians). In On the Special Laws 1.1-11 Philo acknowledges that circumcision is ridiculed among many people. He then gives six reasons (four from the traditions and two he wishes to add) in strong support of the practice of circumcision. The reasons given relate primarily to what may be called health concerns, but Philo does say that circumcision is a symbol of “... The excision of the pleasures which delude the mind”(1.9).
Philo’s other notable discussion about circumcision occurs in On the Migration of Abraham 89-93. Here Philo is worried about those who would emphasize the symbolic meaning of circumcision to the neglect of literal circumcision: “For there are some men, who, looking upon written laws as symbols of things appreciable by the intellect, have studied some things with superfluous accuracy, and have treated others with neglectful indifference ...”(89).He argues that sabbath observance has a clear symbolic meaning, but then he states that: “... It does not follow that on that account we may abrogate the laws which are established respecting it ...”(91). He argues similarly for the understanding of Jewish festivals. Thus, he reasons: “... Because the rite of circumcision is an emblem of the excision of pleasures and of all the passions, ... Does it follow that we are to annul the law which has been enacted about circumcision?”(92). He concludes by urging reflection on symbolic meanings, but also stating that “... So also must we take care of the laws that are enacted in plain terms: for while they are regarded, those other things also will be more clearly understood ...”(93).
It may be assumed from Philo’s discussion that there was probably internal debate within Judaism over the necessity of literal circumcision (see also, e.g., Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 20.38-45). One is tempted to speculate as well whether Philo’s nephew Tiberius Alexander’s apostasy from Jewish practices, noted earlier, had any specific impact on his thinking at this point. Certainly Philo’s perspective helps in understanding the deep commitment of the so-called Judaizers in the early church to circumcision and the “radical”nature of Paul’s strong rejection of circumcision for gentile believers in Jesus as Christ and Lord.
Another area of importance in the study of Philo is his use of Logos (Word) and Wisdom concepts and beliefs. These issues pervade Philo’s writings and illustrate the depth of Philo’s utilization of Hellenistic philosophical traditions in his understanding of God and the created universe. Philo’s discussions here are vital for understanding the nature of Middle Platonism, of Hellenistic Judaism and probably part of the pre-history of gnosticism and its views of God and the cosmology. Philo’s ideas about Logos/Wisdom are also indispensable for New Testament studies, probably most directly and dramatically in the interpretation of the Gospel of John, especially the Prologue ([John 1:1-14] ). C. H. Dodd’s famous discussion of these issues bears careful reading, even though the debate over his judgments continue to this day. Dodd argues that in addition to the Prologue’s indebtedness to Old Testament concepts, it cannot be fully understood apart from the ideas of Hellenistic Judaism, especially Philo (see C.H. Dodd, The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel[Cambridge: University Press, 1963], Part1, §3 “Hellenistic Judaism: Philo of Alexandria,”pp. 54-73; Part 11, §12 “Logos,”pp. 263-85).
Philo has also often been considered especially significant for the conceptual background of the Epistle to the Hebrews (beginning with the work of Johannes B. Carpzov in 1750).It seems clear that there is no evidence that the author of Hebrews had read Philo and that the author utilizes a whole range of Jewish traditions, some of which have remarkable similarities to the writings of Qumran and the writings of Philo. One of the major assessments of the possible relationship between Hebrews and Philo is that of Ronald Williamson (Philo and the Epistle to the Hebrews[Arbeiten zur Literatur und Geschichte des hellenistischen Judentums 4]; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1970; see also his anthology of Philo cited below).As the recent commentator on Hebrews Harold W. Attridge, observes: “... There are undeniable parallels that suggest that Philo and our author [Of Hebrews] are indebted to similar traditions of Greek-speaking and -thinking Judaism”(The Epistle to the Hebrews: A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews[Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989], p. 29).
One passage in Hebrews illustrates the possible connections between the thought worlds of Philo and the author of Hebrews. In [Heb 8:5] the author argues: “They offer worship in a sanctuary that is a sketch and shadow of the heavenly one”(NRSV). The distinction between a “heavenly reality”and the observable, phenomenal world as “sketch and shadow”is a (Middle) Platonic idea, but bears much in common with Philo’s expressions of these ideas (see Attridge, p. 219).
Philo has considerable relevance for understanding the position of women and attitudes towards them by literate men at the time of Second Temple Judaism and the early church. Philo makes numerous comments on women and on issues of the “feminine.”At least two books in English have been devoted to these matters:
Baer, Richard A. Philo’s Use of the Categories Male and Female. Arbeiten zur Literatur und Geschichte des hellenistischen Judentums 3. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1970; and Sly, Dorothy. Philo’s Perception of Women. Brown Judaic Studies 209. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990.
One might also want to consult the numerous references to Philo (see index) in Leonard Swidler, Women in Judaism: The Status of Women in Formative Judaism(Metuchen, N.J.: Scarecrow Press, 1976).
There are numerous passages in Philo that one might consult as an introduction to the issues of Philo’s perception of women. Perhaps the most important are: Flaccus 89; On the Special Laws 1.200; 2.124; 3.169-177; On the Creation 151-152; Questions and Answers on Genesis 1.33; and Contemplative Life (throughout; on this see Ross Shepard Kraemer, Her Share of the Blessings: Women’s Religions Among Pagans, Jews, and Christians in the Greco-Roman World[New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992], 106-27). These texts and their perceptions are part of a significant cultural perspective for the interpretation and assessment of the texts about women and their roles in the New Testament.
Philo is significant for lexical and conceptual terms and ideas that are reflected in the language of the New Testament. Most of the articles in the well-known Theological Dictionary of the New Testament(ed. Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich; trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley; 10 volumes [Vol. 10 is the index by Ronald E. Pitkin]; Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1964-1976) include discussions, often lengthy, of Philo’s use of a particular term and concept. The index to The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology(ed. Colin Brown; 3 volumes; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1975-1978) prepared by David Townsley and Russell Bjork (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1985; now bound with the Dictionary in four volumes) actually includes Philo and has about 500 references to specific citations of Philo in the NIDNTT.
One of the primary goals of this one-volume, accessible translation of Philo is to enable any person to look up easily the full context of passages cited from Philo in Kittel-Friedrich’s TDNT, C. Brown’s NIDNTT, critical commentaries, and scholarly articles. It is also hoped that persons will read whole works of Philo in order to get a genuine feeling for this type of Hellenistic Jewish exegetical tradition. The few suggestions offered in this introduction are meant both to whet the appetite for such study and to serve as examples of the richness of Philo as a resource for the study of Second Temple Judaism and the early church, especially the New Testament. It should be noted, however, that Philo is also helpful for the study of some of the early church fathers, especially perhaps Clement of Alexandria (ca. AD. 160-215) and Origen (ca. AD. 185-251). The standard titles given to the writings of Philo are in Latin, as are the common abbreviations. The following table gives the “official”list of Philo’s main writings along with the standard English title as represented in the Loeb Classical Library edition of Philo.
Abr
De Abrahamo On Abraham
Aet.
De Aeternitate Mundi On the Eternity of the World
Agr
De Agricultura On Husbandry
Cher.
De Cherubim On the Cherubim
Conf.
De Confusione Linguarum On the Confusion of Tongues
Congr.
De Congressu Eruditionisgratia On the Preliminary Studies
Decal.
De Decalogo On the Decalogue
Det.
Quod Deterius Potiori insidiari solet The Worse attacks the Better
Ebr.
De Ebrietate On Drunkenness
Flacc. In Flaccum
Flaccus
Fug.
De Fuga et Inventione On Flight and Finding
Gig.
De Gigantibus On the Giants
Hyp.
Hypothetica/Apologia pro ludaeis Apology for the Jews
Jos.
De Josepho On Joseph
Leg.
De Legatione ad Gaium On the Embassy to Gaius
Leg. All.
Legum Allegoriarum Allegorical Interpretation
Mig.
Deu 11:1-32 figrationeAbrahami On the Migration of Abraham
Mos.
De Vita Mosis
Moses
Mut.
De Mutatione Nominum On the Change of Names
Op.
De Opificio Mundi On the Creation
Plant.
De Plantatione On Noah’s Work as a Planter
Post.
De Posteritate Caini On the Posterity and Exile of Cain
Praem.
De Praemiis et Poenis On Rewards and Punishments
Prov.
De Providentia On Providence
Quaest in Gn.
Questiones et Solutiones in Genesin Questions and Answers on Genesis
Quaest in Ex.
Questiones et Solutiones in Exodum Questions and Answers on Exodus
Quis Het.
Quis rerum divinarum Heres sit Who is the Heir
Quod Deus.
Quod Deussit Immutabilis On the Unchangeableness of God
Quod Omn. Prob.
Quod omnis Probus Libersit Every Good Man is Free
Sac.
De SacriNciisAbelis et Caini On the Sacrifices of Abel and Cain
Sob.
De Sobrietate On Sobriety
Som.
De Somniis On Dreams
Spec. Leg.
De Specialibus Legibus On the Special Laws
Virt.
De Virtute On the Virtues
Vit. Cont.
De Vita Contemplativa On the Contemplative Life
Questions and Answers on Genesisand Questions and Answers on Exodushave survived only in an Armenian version. Apology for the Jewsand On Providenceare fragmentary works which survive as quoted by the ancient church historian Eusebius.
Another one of Philo’s writings, extant only in Armenian (apart from four very brief Greek fragments), has recently been translated into English for the first time (and for the first time into any modern language). This is On Animals(Anim.; De Animalibus):
Terian, A. Philonis Alexandrini De Animalibus: The Armenian Text with an Introduction, Translation, and Commentary. Studies in Hellenistic Judaism, Supplements to Studia Philonica1. Chico: Scholars Press, 1981.
There are many texts which have been incorrectly attributed to Philo. For a study of these matters one should consult:
Royse, J. R. The Spurious Text of Philo of Alexandria: A Study of the Textual Transmission and Corruption with Indexes to the Major Collections of Greek Fragments. Arbeitenzur Literature und Geschichte des hellenistischen Judentums 22. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1991.
There are two indexes to the Greek texts of Philo:
Leisegang, H. Indices ad Philonis Alexandrini Opera. Volume 7 [In two parts] of L. Cohn and P. Wendland, Philonis opera quae supersuntI-VI. Berlin, 1896-1915; 1926-1930.
Mayer, G. Index Philoneus. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, 1974. For English readers, in addition to the indexes in the present volume, volume 10 of the Loeb Classical Library edition of Philo provides various indexes prepared by J. W. Earp: Scripture Index (pp. 189-268); Index of Names (pp. 269-433); Index to Translators’Notes(pp. 434-86); and Index to Greek Words in the Translators’Notes (pp. 487-520). For additional help in lexical searches in Philo’s Greek text, one should consult D. T. Runia, “How To Search Philo,”The Studia Philonica Annual: Studies in Hellenistic Judaism, vol. 2, 1990(ed. D. T. Runia; Brown Judaic Studies 226; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990), 106-39.
Three anthologies of selections of Philo in English have appeared in the last two decades.These volumes are useful collections; the two by Winston and Williamson contain helpful, up-to-date introductions to Philo. These collections are:
Glatzer, N. N. Philo Judaeus: The Essential Philo. New York: Schocken Books, 1971 [This anthology uses the translation of C. D. Yonge, reproduced in this volume].
Winston, D. Philo of Alexandria: The Contemplative Life, The Giants, and Selections: Translation and Introduction. Preface by J. Dillon. Classics of Western Spirituality. Newt York/Ramsey/Toronto: Paulist, 1981.
Williamson, R. Jews in the Hellenistic World: Philo. Cambridge Commentaries on Writings ion the Jewish and Christian World 200 BC to AD 200 I. ii. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989. The two major introductory books on Philo in English, from which users of this volume could greatly profit, are:
Goodenough, E. R. An Introduction to Philo Judaeus. 2d ed. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1962 [first ed., New Haven: Yale University Press, 1940].Sandmel, S. Philo of Alexandria: An Introduction. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1979.
Some of the most noteworthy, recent survey articles on Philo include:
Borgen, P. “Philo of Alexandria.”Anchor Bible Dictionary. 6 vols. Edited by D. N. Freedman; New York: Doubleday, 1992, 5.333-42.
Borgen, P. “Philo of Alexandria.”Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period: Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha, Qumran Sectarian Writings, Philo, Josephus. Edited by M. E. Stone; Compendia Rerum Iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum 2. Assen/Maastricht: VanGorcum/Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984. Pages 233-82.
Borgen, P. “Philo of Alexandria: A Critical and Synthetical Survey of Research since World War II.”Aufstieg und Niedergang der nmischen Welt2 21,1. Edited by W. Haase; BerIin and New York: de Gruyter, 1984. Pages 98-154.
Morris, J. “The Jewish Philosopher Philo.”§34 in The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ(175 B.C.-A.D. 135). E. Schurer; new English version revised and edited by G. Vermes, F. Millar and M. Goodman. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark,1987, vol. 3, pt. 2, 809-89.
Runia, D. T. “How to Read Philo.”Nederlands Theologisch Tiidschrift40 (1986), 185-98.
There are excellent bibliographic resources for identifying and locating scholarly publications on Philo. The major ones, in order of publication, are:
Goodenough, E. R. and Goodhart, H. L. “A General Bibliography of Philo.”In E. R. Goodenough, The Politics of Philo Judaeus. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1938;reprinted Hildesheim, 1967. Pages 128-348.
Feldman, Louis. Studies in Judaica: Scholarship on Philo and Josephus(1937-1962). New York: Yeshiva University, n.d. [19631.
Hilgert, E. “Bibliographia Philoniana 1935-1981.”Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt2 21,1. Edited by W. Haase. Pages 47-97. Berlin and New York: de Gruyter, 1984 [This combines the bibliographies of E. Hilgert which appeared in each of the six issues of Studia Philonica between 1972 and 1980].
Radice, R. and D. T. Runia, with R. Bitter and D. Satran. Philo of Alexandria: An Annotated Bibliography1937-1986. Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae 4. Leiden: E.J. Brill,1988.
Runia, D. T., R. Radice, and D. Satran. “A Bibliography of Philonic Studies 1981-1986.”The Studia Philonica Annual: Studies in Hellenistic Judaism, vol. 1, 1989. Edited by D. T. Runia. Pages 95-123. Brown Judaic Studies 185. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1989.
Runia, D. T., R. Radice, and D. Satran. “Philo of Alexandria: An Annotated Bibliography 1986-87.”The Studia Philonica Annual: Studies in Hellenistic Judaism, vol. 2, 1990. Edited by D. T. Runia. Pages 141-69. Brown Judaic Studies 226. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990. “Supplement: A Provisional Bibliography 1988-89.”Pages 170-75.
Runia, D. T., R. Radice, and P. A. Cathey, “Philo of Alexandria: An Annotated Bibliography 1987-88.”The Studia Philonica Annual: Studies in Hellenistic Judaism, vol. 3, 1991. Edited by D. T. Runia. Pages 347-68. Brown Judaic Studies 230. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1991. “Supplement: A Provisional Bibliography 1989-91.”Pages 369-74.
Runia, D. T., et al. “Philo of Alexandria: An Annotated Bibliography 1988-89.”The Studia Philonica Annual: Studies in Hellenistic Judaism, vol. 4, 1992. Edited by D. T. Runia. Pages 97-116. Brown Judaic Studies 264. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992. “Supplement: A Provisional Bibliography 1990-92.”Pages 117-24.
Runia, D. T., et al. “Philo of Alexandria: An Annotated Bibliography 1990.”The Studia Philonica Annual: Studies in Hellenistic Judaism, vol. 5, 1993. Edited by D. T. Runia. Pages 180-97. Brown Judaic Studies 287. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1993. “Supplement: A Provisional Bibliography 1991-93.”Pages 198-208.
Runia, D. T., et al. “Philo of Alexandria: An Annotated Bibliography 1991.”The Studia Philonica Annual: Studies in Hellenistic Judaism, vol. 6, 1994. Edited by D. T. Runia. Pages 122-50. Brown Judaic Studies 299. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1994. “Supplement: A Provisional Bibliography 1992-94.”Pages 151-59.
Bibliographic data on Philo will continue to be provided in The Studia Philonica Annual.
I want to express my appreciation to Gregory Sterling, on the faculty at the Universityof Notre Dame, for translating most of the Philo texts added to the work of C. D. Yonge, and to James Ernest, doctoral student at Boston College, for translating one Philo text. I am grateful to two of my student assistants at North Park Theological Seminary, Donald Nelson and Jeffrey Koenig, for their significant help in keying Yonge’s translation to the numbering system used in the Loeb Classical Library. I am indebted to the patience, help, and friendship of David Townsley and Patrick Alexander of Hendrickson Publishers. They kindly invited me to produce an introduction to this edition of Philo and worked with diligence and grace in bringing the project to completion. Another kind of gratitude, for which I cannot now find the appropriate words, goes to my wife Jeannette and our daughters Emily and Abigail for their encouragement; they will always know what I mean.
David M. Scholer North Park College and Theological Seminary
January 1993 Minor revisions, September 1995