The Politics of Philo Judaeus: Practice and Theory, with a General Bibliography of Philo

KINGSHIP 95

orphan.^46 He is warned that it is better to receive suppliants for his favor
than men bringing "gifts."^47 The obligation to care in mercy for his
flock, especially for the weaklings, is the notion behind the conception
of the king as the good shepherd which we have already frequently en­
countered. It is commonly so developed in Greek sources.^48 But there is

nothing in Greek literature that I know which specifies the fatherless
and widows. The Christian king in the Middle Ages was always pre­
sented with these as his special obligation, much as Philo has done. This
specific duty seems to me, especially in view of its later history, to be an
important addition to the Greek theory from Hebrew tradition,^49 and
it is interesting to see that if it was not Philo's own contribution, it origi­
nated in his environment of Hellenistic Judaism.
The king is thus benevolent to his people because he is their father:

The ruler ought to stand before his subjects just as a father does before his
children, that he also may be honored in turn as by his own children. Thus
good rulers, to tell the truth, are the universal fathers of cities and tribes, and
display a good will the equal, sometimes the superior, of that of parents. But
those people who get great ruling power at the price of the ruin and loss of
the subjects he [Moses] called not rulers but enemies, since they act the part
of implacable enemies.^50

The fatherhood of the king is likewise based upon the fatherhood of
God along with the other divine characteristics of rulership. The phrase

46. Deed., 40-43; Spec., iv, 170 ff., esp. 176. See I. Heinemann, Philons Bildung, 193-199.


47. Fragment, ap. Harris, Fragments, p. 105. Cf. Diotogenes, ap. Stob., IV, vii, 62: EVftd-
    QiaTOv 8' ?ju,£v 8sl Jtoxxd \iiysftoq djioPAijiovra Tag Tijiag, aKka JIOTTOV To6jtov xal
    xav JigoaiQEoav TOO TijuiovTog.


48. See Dio Chrys., Orat., II, 77. He describes the king as being TOig acftsvioiv doriYOVTa;
    cf. ibid., I, 15 ff., espec. 20: dvayxTi TOV fiixeoov xal qpiX.dv&QCOJtov fiaoiXea \i6\ov
    cpdstaftai wi' dv(H>cojtcov, oXka xal loacrftai. xavx' o$v ei8&g xal q>voei Toioircog &V,
    ftecov xal jto§ov Jtao£xei Tfyv tyvjefyv jtaaiv.
    Diotogenes, ap. Stob., IV, vii, 62: 8EI 8fc x6v ayaftbv pacrdea |3oi#aTix6v TE fjjAEv TCDV
    oeojuEvoov xal svx&Qiaxov.
    He will be d(3ao£a... \mkiaxa JIOTT&C; n/novac; xal xaTaSEEaTs^cog Tate; TUX^S-
    Charondas is closest to Philo of them all when he says: Let rulers IjtaQXEiTcaaav TOic; 8id
    xvyfflv JtEVOM-svoig; Stob., IV, ii, 24 (ed. Wachs. et Hense, IV, 152, 1. 11).


49. Exod. xxii, 22-24; Deut. x, 18; xxiv, 17; xxvii, 19; Ps. xciv, 6; Is. i, 17, 23; x, 2; Ezek.
    xxii, 7; Zech. vii, 10. On this subject see H. Bolkestein, Een geval van sociaal-ethisch syncretisme,
    Amsterdam, 1931 (Mededeelingen der ^. A\ademie van Wetenschappen te Amsterd., Afdeeling
    Letterkunde, LXXII, Ser. B, 1); and the review by H, Windisch, Theologische Literaturzeitung,
    Lvn (1932), 194-196.


50. Spec., iv, 184. On the king as father see Diotogenes, ap. Stob., IV, vii, 62 (ad fin.);
    Sthenidas, ap. Stob., IV, vii, 63. See my "Hellenistic Kingship,'* 73 ff. Dio Chrys., Orat., I, 22:
    jtaTEQa 8s TCOV nokn&v xal TG>V aQ%o\i£v(&v ov \6y<$ XEx^fjcrfrai jxovav, akXa TOIC; EQYOig
    TOVTO ImSeixvucrftai.