Having published an article on
Philo; magic and Balaam earlier this year, it is interesting to come upon an an article by Louis H. Feldman on a similar topic;
Philo's Version of Balaam, published in
Henoch XXV (2003), pp. 301-319.
I was not aware of this article when I wrote mine, hence it is especially interesting to see that Feldman reaches mainly the same conclusions concerning Philo's use of the Balaam figure as I did.
Feldman too says that from the extraordinary amount of space given to Balaam in Philo's works, it is obvious that he was of great interest to Philo. There are several reasons for this interest; First, Philo is much concerned with the phenomenon of prophecy, second, Balaam had a great reputation. thirdly, Philo denigrates Balaam as a prophet because to Philo Moses is the greatest prophet. Furthermore, Moses was known as a magician in several circles, hence Philo wanted to contrast Balaam with Moses in order to emphasize the purity and greatness of Moses in contrast to the magician Balaam.Finally, Philo's editorial-like comments on the figure of Balaam suggests that Philo is here preaching to his contemporaries against the presence of magic in Jewish Alexandria.
Felman refers, inter alia, to an article by Harold Remus,
"Moses and the thaumaturges: Philo's De Vita Mosis as a rescue Operation," in Laval Theologique et Philosophiique 52 (1996): 665-680. Alas, this article is not available in Norway. But according to the summary at the link above, Remus argues in a similar way, and reaches similar conclusions as Feldman and I. My article is, however, more focused on establishing Philo's attitude to magic, while Remus and Feldman focus more on the contrast to Philo's portrait of Moses.
