11. A question remains to be discussed, for answered it can hardly be unless fresh manuscript evidence comes to hand. It is this: How far did Philo carry on his narrative, and are there any traces of the lost conclusion?
There are certain anticipations in our text which, it is reasonable to suppose, were fulfilled. We can predict with confidence that Edab the son of Agag, who appears in the last few lines as the slayer of Saul, will be killed (as in 2 Sam. 1.), with appropriate denunciation. Again, there is a sensational story of the slaying of Ishbi-benob by David and Abishai (Talmud, Tract Sanhedr., f. 45, ap. Eisenmenger, I. 413), in which Abishai kills Orpah the mother of the giant, and eventually David says to Ishbi, "Go, seek thy mother in the grave," whereat he falls. Now, in Philo (LXI. 6) David reminds Goliath that Orpah was his mother, and says to him, "After thy death thy three brethren also will fall into my hands, and then shall ye say unto your mother: He that was born of thy sister (Ruth) did not spare us." I see a foreshadowing here of another tale of giants slain by David. Further, David in his song before Saul (LX.) predicts the mastery over evil spirits that will be attained by Solomon; and elsewhere the writer, in his own person, names Solomon, and speaks of his building the Temple (XXII. 9). The allusion to
[paragraph continues] Solomon and the demons, though unmistakable, is veiled, and, if I may judge from Philo's usual practice, would have received an explanation, accompanied by a reference back to David's song: Nonne haec sunt uerba quae locutus est pater tuus, etc. Another possible instance of foreshadowing is this: Phinehas (XLVIII.), when he has reached the term of 120 years, is commanded to go up into the Mount Danaben and dwell there. In years to come the heavens will be shut at his prayer, and opened again, and then he will be "taken up," and in a yet more remote future will taste of death. In other words, he will be Elijah. I do not think this obscure prediction would have been left hanging in the air: in some form it would have received interpretation. I imagine, therefore, that the story of Elijah (and Elisha) was told in the book. I hardly know if one can fairly adduce here the fact that in an old treatise called Inuentiones Nominum (printed by me in JTS, 1903) some names are given of personages belonging to that period who are anonymous in the Bible. Thus, Abisaac is the 'little maid" of 2 Kings v., Meneria is the Shunamite, and Phua the woman who devoured her child in the siege of Samaria. I lay no stress on this suggestion, for other names are given in the same document which disagree with those in Philo. Still, those I have cited did come from some written source of similar character. 1
Here is another curious phenomenon. In the Apostolic Constitutions (II. 22, 23) the whole story of Manasseh is quoted in a text avowedly compounded from 2 Kings and 2 Chronicles, with the addition of the Prayer and deliverance of Manasseh,
which are non-Biblical, and after a short interval the story of Amon is given, with a spurious insertion to this effect: "Amon said, 'My father did very wickedly from his youth, and repented in his old age. Now therefore I will walk as my soul listeth, and afterward I will return to the Lord.'" just so, in Philo LII. 4, when Eli said to Hophni and Phinehas, "Repent of your wicked ways," they said, "When we are grown old we will repent": and therefore God would not grant them repentance. The resemblance is arresting. The consideration of it suggests the question whether this of Amon and the Prayer of Manasseh and the story of his deliverance can be excerpts from Philo. So far as the Prayer is concerned I cannot think it likely, for that composition is not in our author's manner, and is not believed to be a translation from Hebrew. And, if the Prayer is not from Philo, we need not unnecessarily multiply the authorities used by Const. Ap.
For all that, the story of Manasseh and his deliverance may have been told in Philo: the form of it which appears in the Apocalypse of Baruch (64) rather suggests to me that it was. The Apocalyptist uses Philonic language when he says of Manasseh that "his abode was in the fire"; and, further, he does not account Manasseh's repentance to have been genuine or final, and in this--if I read my author rightly--he writes in the Philonic spirit: for Philo, if he is willing to dwell on the repentance and reform of Israel as a whole, seems to take pleasure in recording the apostasies and transgressions of individuals who do not repent--the sinners under Kenaz, Jair, Gideon, Micah, Doeg.
When Saul protests to Samuel that he is too obscure to be made King, Samuel says (LVI. 6):
[paragraph continues] "Your words will be like those of a prophet yet to come who will be called Jeremiah." This odd prediction is modelled, I suppose, upon the mention of Josiah in 1 Kings 132, and is comparable to Hannah's quotation of a psalm by Asaph (LI. 6). That the fulfilment of it was mentioned is likely enough, but by no means necessary.
Lastly, a phrase in the story of Kenaz demands notice. When God gives him the new set of twelve precious stones to replace certain others that had been destroyed, He says (XXVI. 12) that they are to be placed in the ark, and to be there "until Jahel shall arise to build an house in my name, and then he shall set them before me upon the two cherubim . . . and when the sins of my people are fulfilled, and their enemies begin to prevail over their house, I will take those stones and the former ones (i.e. those already in the priest's breastplate) and put them back in the place whence they were brought, and there shall they be until I remember the world and visit them that dwell on the earth. . . . And Kenaz placed them in the ark . . . and they are there unto this day."
Apart from the mention of Jahel (by whom Solomon is meant, but why so called I know not) this is rather a perplexing passage. Taken as it stands, it ought to mean that the temple, or at least the ark, was extant at the supposed date of the writer, i.e. that the story was not carried down as far as the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar; which, on general grounds, one would select as a likely point for the conclusion. We must however, remember the legend that the ark and its contents were preserved and hidden by Jeremiah or by an angel (2 Macc. 2. Apoc. Bar. 64) . Besides, Philo elsewhere says (XXII. 9)
that in the new sanctuary which was at Gilgal, "Joshua appointed unto this day (usque in hodiernum diem)" the yearly sacrifices of Israel, and that until the temple was built sacrifice at the other place was lawful. We cannot, then, press his use of the phrase "unto this day"; yet if it be insisted upon, there is a detail in Baruch (67) which may throw some light on Philo's meaning. Baruch says that the angel took, among other things, "the forty-eight precious stones wherewith the priest was adorned" and committed them to the guardianship of the earth. No one offers any reason for the mention of forty-eight (instead of twelve) stones, and though only twelve more figure in the story of Kenaz, I think it not unreasonable to suggest that here as elsewhere the Apocalyptist has our text in his mind, and that a belief in the legend of the hidden ark was common to both.
The sketch of Israel's history contained in Apoc. Bar. 56-67 (a section which shows many resemblances to Philo), with its alternations of righteousness and sin, gives, to my mind, a very fair idea of what Philo may have comprised when it was complete. We begin with the sin of Adam and of the angels: both are alluded to more than once in Philo. Then we have Abraham (important in Philo), the wickedness of the Gentiles, and especially of the Egyptians (not emphasized in Philo), the ages of Moses and Joshua (treated at length), the sorceries of the Amorites under the Judges (dwelt on at great length), the age of David and Solomon (Philo breaks off in David), the times of Jeroboam and Jezebel and the captivity of the nine and a half tribes, the reign of Hezekiah, the wickedness of Manasseh, the reforms of Josiah, the destruction by Nebuchadnezzar. Baruch then continues the history to the Messianic kingdom
and the final triumph of right, of which Philo speaks only in general terms, though it may have developed clearer views as it proceeded. For the present, my conjecture is that Philo ended with the Babylonian captivity, and not without an anticipation of the Return. 1
61:1 Another book which deserves consideration in this connexion is the Lives of the Prophets, attributed to Epiphanius.
65:1 But see the Additional Note, p. 73.