Analysis of Philo on Therapeutae
Posted: Mon Sep 06, 2021 5:37 am
billd89,
Since I think you might appreciate this, I once applied the same method I use for the Pauline letters to Philo's section of De vita contemplativa 1.1-90 ("About the Contemplative Life," C D Yonge, vol 1, 1854) on the Therapeutae.
The sections I colored Red seems to be from an original treatise, probably Philo.
The sections colored Blue seems to be his own editorial notes as he prepared the manuscript for publication (just my guess).
The sections colored Black are from a completely different author, adding his opinion about a large number of subjects, although they do all seem to relate to the original (red) discussions at hand. Perhaps this was the hand of a second editor, maybe even his thoroughly Romanized relative Tiberius Alexander, who may have formally published Philo's treatises posthumously (again, just a guess)
Maybe they are all three from the same Philo, at different stages of his life. Unlike Paul's letters, though, these layers are not at odds with one another.
The technique is to follow a train of thought to a digression or literary aporia, then look for the next place the subject picks up again. The intervening text is then subjected to the same sort of analysis, until it yields something sensible and apparent contradictions seem to disappear. The trick is looking for the next *simple and easy* place where the argument picks up again, and not try to get all psychological on Philo (or Paul) or insert one's own POVs into the narrative.
Let me know what you think.
This is intended to be food for thought.
DCH
PS, I have another file around that does something similar with Origen's book Against Celsus, trying to recover what of it were the words (or paraphrases) of Celsus as opposed to Origen's commentary on how horribly wrong Celsus was. I've also done this with sections of Epiphanius' Panarion on Marcionites to separate between his descriptions of them and his often loooooooooong and free-associations that serve up his exegesis explaining how horribly wrong Marcion was.
Since I think you might appreciate this, I once applied the same method I use for the Pauline letters to Philo's section of De vita contemplativa 1.1-90 ("About the Contemplative Life," C D Yonge, vol 1, 1854) on the Therapeutae.
The sections I colored Red seems to be from an original treatise, probably Philo.
The sections colored Blue seems to be his own editorial notes as he prepared the manuscript for publication (just my guess).
The sections colored Black are from a completely different author, adding his opinion about a large number of subjects, although they do all seem to relate to the original (red) discussions at hand. Perhaps this was the hand of a second editor, maybe even his thoroughly Romanized relative Tiberius Alexander, who may have formally published Philo's treatises posthumously (again, just a guess)
Maybe they are all three from the same Philo, at different stages of his life. Unlike Paul's letters, though, these layers are not at odds with one another.
The technique is to follow a train of thought to a digression or literary aporia, then look for the next place the subject picks up again. The intervening text is then subjected to the same sort of analysis, until it yields something sensible and apparent contradictions seem to disappear. The trick is looking for the next *simple and easy* place where the argument picks up again, and not try to get all psychological on Philo (or Paul) or insert one's own POVs into the narrative.
Let me know what you think.
This is intended to be food for thought.
DCH
PS, I have another file around that does something similar with Origen's book Against Celsus, trying to recover what of it were the words (or paraphrases) of Celsus as opposed to Origen's commentary on how horribly wrong Celsus was. I've also done this with sections of Epiphanius' Panarion on Marcionites to separate between his descriptions of them and his often loooooooooong and free-associations that serve up his exegesis explaining how horribly wrong Marcion was.