P H I L written two books, now wholly lost, ITept diaOriKuiv (M. i. 586). (20) Tifpl TOV Oeowe/j.irTOVs elvai TOUS dveipovs (He somniis, lib. i., M. i. 620-058), on the two dreams of Jacob, Gen. xxviii. and xxxi." (21) Book ii. of the same (M. i. 059-690), on the dreams of Joseph, the chief butler, the chief baker, anil Pharaoh, Gen. xxxvii. and xl., xli. Eusebius makes Philo the author of five books on dreams ; three, therefore, are lost. (III.) A work of a very different kind is the group of writing; which, we may call " An Exposition of the Mosaic law for Gentiles," which, in spite of their very various contents, present on nearer examination indubitable marks of close connexion. In them Philo seeks to give an orderly view of the chief points of the Mosaic legislation in the Pentateuch, and to recommend it as valuable to Gentile readers. The method of exposition is somewhat mori popular than in the allegorical commentaries, for, though that method of interpretation is not wholly excluded, the main object is to give such a view of the legislation as Philo accepted as his torical. This work has three main divisions : (a) an Account of the Creation (/coo>o7roua), which Moses put first, to show that his legislation was conformed to the will of nature, and that therefore those who followed it were true cosmopolitans ; (&) the Biographies of the Virtuous, being, so to speak, the living unwritten laws which, unlike written laws, present the general types of moral conduct ; (c) Legislation Proper, in two subdivisions (a) the ten principal chapters of the law, (/3) the special laws belonging to each of these ten. An appendix adds a view of such laws as do not fall under the rubrics of the decalogue, arranged under the headings of certain cardinal virtues. The treatises which belong to this work are the following. (1) Ilept rrjs MwiWuis Kocr/uoTrouas (De mundi opificio, M. i. 1-42). This work does not fall within the number of the allegorical commentaries. On the other hand, the introduction to the treatise De Abrahamo makes clear its im mediate connexion with the De mundi opificio. The position of the De mundi pificio at the head of the allegorical commentaries, which is at present usual in the editions, seems indeed to go back to a very early date, for even Eusebius cites a passage from it with the formula airb TOV Trptbrov T&V els TOV VO/ULOV (Preep. Ev., viii. 12 fin., ed. Gaisford). The group of the Btot o~0(f>Civ is headed by (2) Btos ffoipov TOV Kara didaffKaXiav reXeiudevTos ?) Trepl VO/JLUV dypdfiwi [a], o ecrrt irepl Afipad/m (De Abrahamo, M. ii. 1-40). Abraham is here set forth as the type of SiSaaKoKiKr) dper?}, i.e., of virtue as a thing learned. This biography of Abraham was followed by that of Isaac as a type of (pvffLKT] dpenj, i.e., of innate or natural virtue, which in turn was succeeded by that of Jacob as representing do~K7]TLKr] a.peT q, i.e., virtue acquired by practice ; but both these are now lost. Hence in the editions the next treatise is (3) Bi os TTOITIKOS oVep effTi Trepl IwcrT?^) (De Josepho, M. ii. 41-79), where Joseph is taken as the pattern of the wise man in his civil relations. The Biographies of the Virtuous are followed by (4) Ilepi TU>V dena Xoyiuv a K(f>dXai.a vb/Lt-wv etVt (De decalogo, M. ii. 180-209) and (5) Ilepi T&V dva,<f>epo- {.levuif ev elSei VQ/J.WV els TO. ffvvTeivovTa KecfidXaia T&V deKa Xoywv (De xpecialibus legibus ; the unabridged title is given by Eusebius, //. E., ii. IS, 5). Here under the rubrics of the ten commandments a systematic review of the special laws of the Mosaic economy is given ; for example, under the first and second commandments (divine worship) a survey is taken of the entire legisla tion relating to priesthood and sacrifice ; under the fourth (i.e., the Sabbath law, according to Philo s reckoning) there is a survey of all the laws about feasts ; under the sixth (adultery) an account of matrimonial law ; and so on. According to Eusebius the work embraced four books, which seem to have reached us entire, but in the editions have been perversely broken up into u considerable number of separate tractates, (a) The first book (on the lirst and second commandments) includes the following : De circumcision e (M. ii. 210-212) ; De monarchin, lib. i. (ii. 213-222) ; De monarcliia, lib. ii. (ii. 222-232); De prxmiis sacerdotum (ii. 232-237); De victimis (ii. 237-250); De sacrificantibus, or De victimas oferentibus (ii. 251-264) ; De mercede meretricis non accipienda in sacrarium (ii. 264-269). (V) The second book (on the third, fourth, and fifth commandments, i.e., on perjury, Sabbath observance, and filial piety) is incomplete in Mangey (ii. 270-298), the section De septenario (on the Sabbath and feasts in general) being imperfect, and that De colendis parentibus being entirely wanting. Mai to a large extent made good the defect (De cophini fexto et de colendis parentibus, Milan, ISIS), but Tischen- dorf was the first to edit the full text (Philonea, pp. 1-83). (c) The third book relates to the sixth and seventh commandments (adultery and murder; M. ii. 299-334). (d) To the fourth book (relating to the last three commandments) belongs all that is found in Mangey, ii. 335-374, that is to say, not merely the tractates De judice (ii. 344-34S) and De concupiscentia (ii. 348-358), but also those De just it ia (ii. 358-301) and De creatione principum (ii. 361-374). The last-named is, properly speaking, only a portion of the Dejustitia, which, how ever, certainly belongs to the fourth book, of which the superscription expressly bears that it treats also Trepi diKaioffvvrjs. With this tractate b- gins the appendix to the work De spccialibus legibus, into which, under the rubric of certain cardinal virtues, such Mosaic laws are brought together as could not be dealt with under any of the decalogue rubrics. The continuation of this appendix forms a book by itself. (6) Ilept -rpt.Cjv apeTUV iJTOi irepl dvdpeias Kal (piXavOpuirias Kal /j.eravoias (Defortitudine, M. ii. 375-383; De caritate, ii. 383-405 ; De pccnitentict, ii. 405-407). Finally, in less intimate connexion with this entire work is another treatise still to be mentioned, (7) Kept &6u>i> Kal Trm/j.iuv (De praiiniis et pcenis, M. ii. 40S-42S) and ITept dpuv (De exe- crationibus, M. ii. 429-457), two parts which constitute a single whole and deal with the promises and threatenings of the law. (IV.) Besides the above-named three great works on the Penta teuch, Philo was the author of a number of isolated writings, of which the following have reached us either in their entirety or in fragments. (1) llepl /3tov ]. ._><r<fus (Vita Mosis, lib. i.-iii., M. ii. 80-179). It is usual to group this, as being biographical in its character, with the Btot <ro(j>Cii>, and thus to incorporate it imme diately after the DC Josepho with the large work on the Mosaic legislation. But, as has been seen, the Btot aofyuv are intended to represent the general typos of morality, idrile Moses is by no means so dealt with but as a unique individual. All that can be said is that the literary character of the Vita Mosis is the same as that of the larger work. As in the latter the Mosaic legislation, so in the former the activity of the legislator himself, is delineated for the benefit of Gentile readers. (2) Ilepi TOV TTO-VTO. o-irovdaloi elvai eXeudepov (Quod omnis probw liber, M. ii. 445-470). In the intro duction to this treatise reference is made to an earlier book which had for its theme the converse proposition. The complete work was still extant in the time of Eusebius (H. E., ii. 18, 6) : llepl T,OU dovXov dvai TrdvTa (pavXov, <j5 erjs <TTII> 6 Trepl TOV irdvTa. airovSalov eXevdepov elvai. The genuineness of the writing now possessed by us is not undisputed ; but see Lucius, Dcr Essenismus (1881), pp. 13-23. (3) Ets QXdKKov (Adversus Flaccum, M. ii. 517-544) and (4) Hep! dpeTwv Kal 7rpe<r/3etas Trpos Tdiov (De legatione ad Caium, M. ii. 545-600). These two works have a very intimate connexion. In the first Philo relates how the Roman governor Flaccus in Alexandria, towards the beginning of the reign of Caligula, allowed the Alex andrian mob, without interference, to insult the Jews of that city in the grossest manner and even to persecute them to the shedding of blood. In the second he tells how the Jews had been subjected to still greater sufferings through the command of Caligula that divine honours should be everywhere accorded to him, and how the Jews of Alexandria in vain sought relief by a mission to Rome which was headed by Philo. But both together were only parts of a larger work, in five books, of which the first two and the last have perished. For it is clear from the introduction to the Adversus Flaccum that it had been preceded by another book in which the Jewish persecutions by Sejanus, under the reign of Tiberius, were spoken of, and the Chronicon of Eusebius (ed. Schoene, vol. ii. pp. 150, 151) informs us that these persecutions of Sejanus were related in the second book of the work now under discussion. But from the conclusion of the Legatio ad Caium, which we still possess, we learn that it was also followed by another book which exhibited the TraXivwdia, or change of Jewish fortunes for the better. Thus we make out five books in all, the number actually given by Eusebius (H. E., ii. 5, 1). (5) Ilept irpovoias (De providcntia ). This work has reached us only in an Armenian translation, which has been edited, with a Latin translation, by Aucher (see below). It is mentioned by its Greek title in Eusebius (H, E., ii. 18, 6 ; Prxp. Ev., vii. 20 fin., viii. 13 fin., ed. Gaisford). The Armenian text gives two books, but of these the first, if genuine at all, at any rate appears only in an abridged and somewhat revised state. 1 Eusebius (Prsep. Ev., viii. 14) fpiotes from the second book to an extent that amounts to a series of excerpts from the whole. The short passage in Prtep. Ev., vii. 21, is also taken from this book ; and it appears that Eusebius knew nothing at all about the first. (6) AXe^avdpos rj Trepl TOU X6yov f^etc TO. aXoya fu)a (De Alexandra et quod propriam rationem muta animalia habcant ; so Jerome, DC Vir. III., c. 11) ; the Greek title is given in Euseb., H. E., ii. 18, 6. This also now exists only in an Armenian translation, which has been edited by Aucher. Two small Greek fragments occur in the Florilegium of Leontius and Johannes (Mai, Scr. vet. nov. coll., vii. 1, pp. 99, lOOa). (7) TwodeTiKa, a writing now known to us only through fragments preserved in Euseb. , Prxp. Ev. , viii. 6 7. The title, as Bernays 2 has shown, means "Counsels," "Recom mendations," the reference being to such laws of the Jews as can be recommended also to non- Jewish readers. (8) Ilept lovdaiwv, a title met with in Euseb., H. E., ii. 18, 6. The writing is no doubt the same as H virep Iovdaiwv aTroXoyia, from which a quotation is given in Euseb., Prsep. Ev., viii. 11. To this place also, perhaps, belongs the De nobilitate (M. ii. 437-444), which treats of that true noblesse of wisdom in which the Jewish people also is not wanting. 3 (V.) Spurious works ascribed to Philo. (1) Ilept J3iov dewprjTiKov r) T&v apeT&v (De vita contcmplativa, M. ii. 471-486). That the Therapeutic life here praised is that of Christian monks was seen by Euseb., H. E., ii. 17 (who, however, accepted the book as Philo s), and the same view was long prevalent in the church. 4 But, if the Therapeutai are monks, the book cannot be genuine ; see especially Lucius, Die TJicrapcuten und ihre Stcllung in dcr Gcscli. dcr Askcsc, Strasburg, 1879. There are, however, so many other objections to its genuineness that the book is now given up even by such as do not admit that the Therapeutte are monks. 5 (2) Ilept d<p6apo-ias KOO-U.OV (De incorruptibilitate mundi, M. ii. 487-516). Bernays, who first showed that the received text is disordered by misplacement of leaves (Jfonatsb. Bcrl. Akad., 1863, p. 34 sq. ), published a cor rected text with German version in Abh. Bcrl. Akad., 1876. An unfinished commentary of the same critic was posthumously pub lished in the Berlin Abhandlungcn, 1882. (3) llepl *6<7/xou (Dc mundo, M. ii. 601-624). That this collection of extracts from Philo, and especially from the De incor. mundi, is spurious has been long recognized. (4) Two orations, DC Sampsone and De Jona, pub- 1 See Diels, Doxographi Graici, 1879, pp. 1-4 ; Zeller, Phil. d. Gr., iii. 2, p. 340 (3d ed.). 2 Monatsb. d. Berl. Akad. (1876), pp. 589-609. 3 This conjecture is Dahne s, Theol. Stud. u. Krit. (1833), pp. 990, 1037. 4 So still Montfaucon, the learned notes to whose French translation are still valuable (Paris, 1709). 5 Nicolas, in -Rec. Thcol., Strasburg, 186S, p. 25 sq. ; Kuenen, Godsi.Henst, ii. 440-444; Weingarten, "Monchtum," in Herzog-Plitt, It. E., .
