Philo on the Impermanence of Empires

Résumé En

Reflections on empires among ancient writers can take different directions. Some focus on the succession of specific empires and speculate about the number of empires destined to rule the world, as does the author of the Book of Daniel, for example. 1 Such writers are in various ways concerned with history and how it continues from the past, through the present, and into the future. In some cases, this leads them to speculate about the end of time. 2 Other authors are interested in comparing the empires of the past to the one(s) of their own day. In the Roman period, for example, many orators praise the Romans for establishing an empire that has surpassed all others. This type of comparison is not restricted to orations and can be found in various literary genres. Finally, there are writers who are prone to more philosophical reflections on empires and what causes their rise or decline, their intrinsic instability, or the political factors that help certain ones endure. All these questions may be asked by a single author, though one generally expects a particular problem to dominate the work of any individual. Here, I shall examine whether and how these three lines of thought are present in Philo's work, starting in each case with a brief survey of discourses by ancient Greek writers such as Demetrius of Phalerum, Polybius, Dionysius of Harlicarnassus, Plutarch, Appian, and Aelius Aristides, albeit the last three were active only after Philo's death and, in the case of Appian and Aelius, extend into the second half of the second century CE. I shall then compare their discourses with that of Philo, in