XIII. THE RELATION OF PHILO'S
IDEAS TO GREEK PHILOSOPHY'
915.*Agrippa, Henry Cornelius, The Vanity of Arts and Sciences, London,
1676, pp. [8], 10, 368.
(Probably the third English edition of a translation of Agrippa. The
first was Englished by Ja[mes] San[ford], and was printed in 1569,
the second in 1575.) On p. 132 Philo the Jew is cited in support of one
of the theories of Pythagoras.
- Fabricius, M. Joh. Albertus, Exercitatio de Platonismo Philonis Judaei,
Leipzig, [1693], pp. [12].
•Reprinted in B. Jo. Albertus Fabricius, Opusculorum historico<ritico-
literariorum, sylloge quae sparsim viderant lucem, Hamburg, 1738,
147-160.
The first paper in the later volume is made up of a series of notes of
100 suspected plagiarisms, fictitious authors, and works known only by
tide and probably non-existent; Philo's De Mundo is discussed in this
connection on p. 68 n.
917.* Suidas, lexicon, graece & latine. Textutn graecum cum manuscriptis
codicibus collatum a quamplurimis mendis purgavit, notisque perpe-
tuis illustravit: versionem latinam Aemilii Porti innumeris in locis
correxit; indicesque auctorum et rerum adjecit Ludolphus Kusterus,
Cambridge (England), 1705, 3 vols.; see III, 613. - Wesseling, Peter, Epistola... ad virum celeberrimum H. Venemam
de Aquilae in scriptis Philonis Jud. fragmentis et Platonis epistola
XIIL &c, Trajecti ad Rhenum (Utrecht a. R.), 1748, pp. 51.
9i9.f Pelagius [Joseph Priestley?], "Of the Platonism of Philo," J. Priesdey,
The Theological Repository (Birmingham), IV (1784), 408-420.
920 .f Jahnius, Albertus, "Plagiarium Herennium personatum cum expilato
Philone Iudaeo comparat," Archiv fiir Philologie und Paedagogi\
(Supplementband to Neue Jahrbucher fiir Philologie und Paedago-
gi), X (1844), 165-176. - There is no certain trace of Philo in any ancient pagan document. Geffcken (no. 956a,
pp. 88 and 277 n. 3) says that Heliodorus, Aethiopica, IX, 9 (edit, of Immanuel Bekker, Leipzig,
1855), contains a quotation from Philo. Heliodorus: fteojt^acrcovcri xov Nei^ov Ai/yvJtTioi,
xal KQ6ITT 6 VO»V TOV niyioxw fLyovow, &vx£(uu.ov OXJQOVOV TOV Jtoxajiov as\i\r\yoQovyxe^.
Philo, Mos., ii, 195: fteoji&aaxovoa x<p A.6Y<P xbv Ne&ov Atyvjixioi <frc; avxiuiixov ovoavov
78YOv6xa xal JIEQI xrjc; XCOQac; O£\i\r\y0Q0VOiv. The two statements are certainly very similar,
and the whole passage in Heliodorus is clearly from a mystic source. But Philo also drew from
mystic Pythagorean material so heavily that A. D. Nock, Conversion; the Old and the New in
Religion from Alexander the Great to Augustine of Hippo, Oxford, 1933, seems more correct in
his note (p. 286) where he suggests a common source for the two, than in the text (p. 29)
where he states that the Heliodorus passage is from Philo.
250