KINGSHIP 115- Praem., 95. 113. See above, p. 24. 114. Praem., 93.
- Gloss in Philos Wer\e (Bibliography no. 492), ad loc.
Roman emperor which would imply veneration, and led his friends to
Rome to try to get his attitude sanctioned by Gaius, it little appeared
that the successors of this group in Christianity would ultimately be vic
torious, and force the distinction upon the Empire, so that monarchy
for the next fifteen hundred years would keep the kingly ideal of the
ancients, but keep also the modification which the racial feeling of
Hellenistic Jews had required.There is one more aspect of Philo's ideas of kingship which must be
examined. For over against the claims of the Roman emperors Philo
himself occasionally gives us a glimpse of a still higher type of king for
whom he was looking, that figure which is usually called the Messiah.
An ideal warrior and king was to come who would "subdue great and
populous nations."^112 Philo has little to say about the Messianic hope,
but what he does say shows that there was much more thought of it
than he dares write. In his scarcely veiled vituperation of the Roman
rule at Alexandria, as he wrote it under cover of an allegory of Joseph
for the faithful in the Allegory, he has been seen to remind them
quietly of the true Herdsman who was to lay the ax at the very roots."^3
Somewhat more openly, but still kept well within the generalities, is the
discussion of the promised "Man" in De Benedictionibus, printed by
Cohn as a part of De Praemiis et Poenis. Philo has been describing the
golden age of the future. At that time the enemies of the Jews (the
"pious") may try to rise against them, but when they see that the Jews
have the alliance of the Just One or Justice (0 SIKCCIOC or TO SIKCUOV),^114
the gentiles (the "wicked") will drop their arms and flee. For Virtue is
in itself invincible. So the promised Man will come, lead the armies,
and conquer all men. The Greek is obscure as to whether Philo here
means TOU SiKaiou as the genitive of the masculine or of the neuter. Is
he referring to "the Just One" (God or the Messiah), or to "Justice"?
Leopold Cohn took it as a reference to God,^115 but it seems rather a
parallel of the apery) of the next line, the ultimately invincible force.
The promised Man, who is mentioned almost immediately, is appar
ently the bringer, the incarnation of this apery). At least that is a possible
interpretation of the passage.
The difficulties continue in that the next sentence is quite unintelli-