The Works of Philo Judaeus, Vol. IV (Yonge)
- Language:
- English
- Translation:
- C. D. Yonge
- Status:
- Selection or partial work
- Authorship:
- Written by the author
- Condition of the text:
- No scanning noise detected (automatic measure over the whole text, not checked by hand)
- Extent:
- ~280,000 words · 1,338 passages
Cite this work
- APAPhilo of Alexandria. (n.d.). The Works of Philo Judaeus, Vol. IV (Yonge) (C. D. Yonge, Trans.). Digital reproduction: SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/en/works/philo-of-alexandria/the-works-of-philo-judaeus-vol-iv-yonge
- MLAPhilo of Alexandria. The Works of Philo Judaeus, Vol. IV (Yonge). Translated by C. D. Yonge. Digital reproduction, SigPhi, https://sigphiai.com/en/works/philo-of-alexandria/the-works-of-philo-judaeus-vol-iv-yonge.
- ChicagoPhilo of Alexandria. The Works of Philo Judaeus, Vol. IV (Yonge). Translated by C. D. Yonge. Digital reproduction, SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/en/works/philo-of-alexandria/the-works-of-philo-judaeus-vol-iv-yonge.
Reference to the edition that SigPhi reproduces: SigPhi is its digital reproduction, not its publisher. The edition's year is not in the metadata (hence "n.d."), and the translator appears only when recorded.
What it is about
Volume IV of Philo's treatises in C. D. Yonge's English translation, closing the series.
Context and history
As in the earlier volumes: the division into volumes belongs to Yonge's nineteenth-century edition, not to Philo, who comes down to us as independent treatises. The reference that works is the treatise title and the paragraph number. And the thing that really matters bears repeating: this Philo reached us because Christians copied him, not through the rabbinic tradition, which barely cites him.
Editorial context, not a citable source: unlike the passages of the work itself, these statements cannot be checked against the corpus.
The Greeks celebrate Anaxagoras and Democritus, because they, being smitten with a desire for philosophy, allowed all their estates to be devoured by cattle. I myself admire the men who thus showed themselves superior to the attractions of money ; but how much better were those who have not permitted cattle to devour their possessions, but have supplied the necessities of mankind, of their own relations and friends, and have made them rich though they were poor before ? For surely that was inconsiderate conduct (that I may avoid saying that any action of men whom Greece has agreed to admire was a piece of insanity) ; but this is the act of sober men, and one which has been carefully elaborated by exceeding prudence. For what more can enemies do than ravage, and destroy, and cut down all the trees in the country of their antagonists, that they may be forced to submit by reason of the extent to which they are oppressed by want of necessaries ? And yet Democritus did this to his own blood relations, inflicting artificial want and penury upon them, not perhaps from any hostile intention towards them, but because he did not foresee and provide for what was advantageous to others. How much better and more admirable are they who, without having any inferior eagerness for the attainment of philosophy, have nevertheless preferred magnanimity to carelessness, and, giving presents from their possessions instead of destroying them, so as to be able to benefit others and themselves also, have made others happy by imparting to them of the abundance of their wealth, and themselves by the study of philosophy ? For an undue care for money and wealth causes great waste ON A CONTEMPLATIVE LIFE.…