The proposition thus enunciated was thoroughly con- genial to the Alexandrine character; and henceforth it was the chief object of Jewish speculation to trace out the subtle analogies which were supposed to exist between the writings of Moses and the teaching of the schools. The circumstances under which the philo- sophical studies first gained a footing at Alexandria favored the attempt. For some time the practical sciences reigned supreme, and the issue of these was scepticism (Matter, Hist, de Vecole d'Alex. iii, 162 sq.). Then at length the clear analysis and practical moral- ity of the Peripatetics found ready followers, and, in the strength of the reaction, men eagerly trusted to those splendid ventures with which Plato taught them to be content till they could gain a surer knowledge (Ph(vd. p. 85). To the Jew this surer knowledge seemed to be already given, and the belief in the ex- istence of a spiritual meaning underlying the letter of Scripture was the threat principle on which all his in- vestigations rested. The facts were supposed to lie essentially symbolic ; the language the veil (or some- times the mask) which partly disguised from common sight the truths which it enwrapped. In this way a twofold object was gained. It became possible to withdraw the Supreme Being (to ov, o u»v) from im- mediate contact with the material world, and to apply the narratives of the Bible to the phenomena of the soul. It is impossible to determine the process by which these results were embodied ; but, as in parallel cases, they seem to have been shaped gradually in the minds of the mass, and not fashioned at once by one great teacher. Even in the Sept. there are traces of an endeavor to interpret the anthropomorphic imagery
ALEXANDRIAN
158
ALEXANDRIAN
of the Hebrew text [see SeptuAgixt], and there can I at Alexandria, is extremely doubtful. The testimony be no doubt that the Commentaries of Aristobulus of Philip of Sida is not very trustworthy, and the si- gave some form and consistency to the allegoric sys- j lence of Eusebius, and Athenagoras's way of teaching, tern. In the time of Philo (B.C. 20-A.D. 50) the , which is by no means Alexandrine, speak against it. theological and interpretative systems were evidently About A. I). 190 Clement became assistant to Pantre- fixed even in many of their details, and he appears in i nus, and, about 203, head of the school. Origen be- both cases only to have collected and expressed the j came connected with the school as teacher when only popular opinions of his countrymen. See Philo. \ a youth of 18 years, and he labored then, with some
In each of these great forms of speculation — the { brief interruptions, until 232, when he was expelled theological and the exegetical — Alexandrianism has i from Alexandria. In the later years of his stay at an important bearing upon the apostolic writings. Alexandria he was assisted by his disciple and succes- But the doctrines which are characteristic of the Alex- sor Heraclas, who subsequently became bishop of andrian school were by no means peculiar to it. The \ Alexandria. Heraclas was succeeded by Dionysius, same causes which led to the formation of wider I also a disciple of Origen, and later, likewise a bishop views of Judaism in Egypt, acting under greater re- : of Alexandria. The celebrity of the Alexandrian straint, produced corresponding results in Palestine. ! school continued for some time after the death of Dio- A doctrine of the Word (Memrd), and a system of j nysius, notwithstanding the rival institution which mystical interpretation grew up within the rabbinic < arose at Caesarea Palaestina?, and which was for some schools, which bear a closer analogy to the language time conducted by Origen. It did not cease until the of the Apostle John and to the "allegories" of Paul close of the fourth century. than the speculations of Philo. See Logos. j Of the history of the school after the death of Dio-
The speculative doctrines which thus worked for the j nj-sius we are, however, but imperfectly informed, general reception of Christian doctrine were also em- | Eusebius (//. E. vii, 32) names among the successors bodied in a form of society which was afterward trans- I of Dionysius only Achillas, whose name is wholly ferred to the Christian Church. Numerous bodies of omitted by Philip of Sida, and who, at all events, was ascetics (Therapevtce), especially on the borders of I less prominent than Pierius, who is mentioned by Lake Mareotis, devoted themselves to a life of cease- ' Philip and by Photius (Cod. 118). The names of less discipline and study. See Therapeut.e. Un- j Theognostus and Serapion are given as principals of like the Essenes, who present the corresponding phase I the school only by Philip. It is possible, as Philip in Palestinian life, they abjured society and labor, and j states, that about the close of the third century the often forgot, as it is said, the simplest wants of nature ' Alexandrian bishop and martyr, Peter (Euseb. //. E. in the contemplation of the hidden wisdom of the vii, 32), gave catechetical instruction, and later, about. Scriptures (Philo, De Vit. Contempt, throughout). The the middle of the fourth century, an Alexandrian description which Philo gives of their occupation and monk, Macarius. Arius, the originator of Arianism,