Platonic" begins with Antiochus of Ascalon (ca. 130-68 B.C.) and ends
with Plotinus (204-70 A.D.), who is considered the founder of
Neoplatonism. The Middle Platonic philosophers inherited the
exegetical and speculative problems of the Old Academy, established by
Plato and continued by his successors Speusippus (ca. 407-339 B.C.),
Xenocrates (ca. 396-314 B.C.) , and Polemo (ca. 350-267 B.C.). Many of
these problems centered about the interpretation of Plato's so-called
Unwritten Doctrines, inspired by Pythagorean philosophy and involving
a primordial, generative pair of first principles—the One and the
Dyad—and how to square this doctrine with the account of creation
given in the Timaeus dialogue. This was also the main concern of the
Neopythagorean philosophy that emerged with the work of Ocellus
Lucanus in the second century B.C., whose treatise On the Nature of
the Universe shows the influence of both Platonic and Aristotelian
conceptions.
The Academy took a new turn after the founding of the Stoic school by
Zeno of Citium (334-262 B.C.), a pupil of Polemo. Arcesilaus (ca.
315-241 B.C.) is regarded as the founder of the New Academy, known for
its skepticism. Later, Antiochus asserted the fundamental harmony of
the Platonic, Peripatetic (Aristotelian), and Stoic philosophies, and
Eudorus of Alexandria (fl. ca. 25 B.C.) elucidated the highly
influential teleological dogma of Platonism: "likeness to god as far
as possible" (Plato, Theaetetus 176b). Other important Middle
Platonists were Philo of Alexandria (ca. 30 B.C.-45 A.D.), who
interpreted Hebrew Scripture along Platonic lines, exercising an
immense influence on developing Christianity; Plutarch of Chaeronea
(ca. 45-125 A.D.) whose treatise De Iside et Osiride ("On Isis and
Osiris"), with its Greco-Egyptian syncretism, is an important example
of the religious tendencies of later Middle Platonic philosophy; and
Numenius of Apamea (fl. 150-176 A.D.) whose highly syncretic
philosophy exercised a profound influence on Plotinus, who was accused
of plagiarizing Numenius.
In addition to these "mainstream" philosophers, the Middle Platonic
period includes the more esoteric systems of the Gnostics, the Corpus
Hermeticum and the Chaldaean Oracles. All of these involved an "astral
piety" with a notion of planetary powers and intra-cosmic daemons
mediating between humanity and the highest cosmic deities.
1. Plato's "Unwritten Doctrines"
Platonic philosophy did not originate solely with the Dialogues of
Plato. There is ample evidence from antiquity that Plato taught
certain doctrines within the Academy that he did not write down;
moreover, these doctrines were sufficiently vague as to cause
divergent interpretations even among the first three successors of
Plato in the Academy. It is these doctrines — perhaps even moreso than
the Dialogues (excepting the Timaeus) – from which are derived the
problems and approaches characteristic of Middle Platonic thought. A
basic outline of these doctrines follows.
Drawing upon Pythagorean mathematical theory, Plato began his
metaphysical schema with a pair of opposed first principles, the One
and the Indefinite Dyad. The One is the active principle which imposes
limit on the indefinite or unlimited Dyad, thereby laying the ground
for the orderly construction of the cosmos. Through this influence of
the One upon the Dyad numbers are generated, that is, the Decad, which
in turn generates all other numbers. The most important of these
primordial numbers is the tetraktys, numbers one through four, the sum
total of which is ten, the Decad. The tetraktys also was interpreted
by Plato as generating the four mathematical dimensions, with the
number one corresponding to the point, two to the line, three to the
plane, and four to the solid. Between the Ideal-Numbers or Decad Plato
places the World-Soul, corresponding roughly to the Demiurge of the
Timaeus. The World-Soul mediates between the Ideal realm and matter,
projecting the four dimensions on base matter in order to form the
four elements, Fire, Air, Water, and Earth. This basic schema of a
first and second principle, and third intellectual and craftsmanly
principle responsible for forming the cosmos, was to have an immense
influence on the history of Greek philosophy, especially the period
reviewed in this article. The following cryptic passage from the
Platonic Second Letter (generally accepted as from Plato's hand in
antiquity) had a profound effect on the imagination of Platonic and
Pythagorean philosophers of the Middle and Neoplatonic periods. This
passage, though more than likely written by a student of Plato,
nevertheless provides a hint of what the teacher's more esoteric
teachings may have been like.
Upon the king of all do all things turn; he is the end of all things
and the cause of all good. Things of the second order turn upon the
second principle, and those of the third order upon the third (312e,
tr. G.R. Morrow, in J.M. Cooper, ed., 1997).
Among the many problems inherited by Plato's successors and their
students and colleagues are included the questions of whether the
creation of the cosmos, as described in the Timaeus, took place in
time or is atemporal, and the manner in which Demiurge of that
dialogue relates to the World-Soul of the unwritten doctrines.
2. The Old Academy
The term "Old Academy" is used to refer to the educational institution
established by Plato in Athens, and run by his three immediate
successors. This is to differentiate it from the "New Academy,"
so-called because of its turn toward a more sceptical mode of
philosophizing.
a. Speusippus
After the death of Plato the headship of the Academy passed to his
nephew Speusippus (ca. 407-339 B.C.), according to Plato's wishes.
Speusippus seems to have revised Plato's doctrine of the One and the
Dyad by placing the One above Intellect, declaring that it is superior
to Being and "free[ing] it even from the status of a principle"
(fragment in Klibansky 1953, tr. Dillon 1977, p. 12). In this he
differed, as Dillon observes, "with all official Platonism up to
Plotinus" (p. 18). The result of this difference is that the Dyad is
now considered the sole productive source of multiplicity, from which
all other levels of reality derive. Speusippus elaborated a
multi-layered cosmic schema in ten stages or "grades" (Zeller 1955, p.
169) of Being: 1.) the supreme One beyond Being, 2.) the Indefinite
Dyad or the Many (producer of multiplicity), 3.) Number (beginning
with three, the first stage of multiplicity), 4.) the Soul, source of
all geometrical extension, 5.) the celestial bodies, 6.) all ensouled
beings, including irrational animals and plants, 7.) Thought, and the
seven planets and the seven Greek vowels, 8.) instinct and the
passions, 9.) motion, 10.) the Good, and repose. By locating the Good
at the end of this emanative process – which is properly understood,
as Zeller (1955, p. 169) writes, as "eternal principles of things and
their stages of development" – Speusippus is not denying the
ontological supremacy of the One, rather he is recognizing the One as
the most simplex and primordial of all realities, and as "the cause of
goodness and being for all other things" (Dillon 1977, p. 12).
According to Speusippus the cosmos is eternally generated; therefore,
he interpreted the creation account in the Timaeus as intended for
purposes of instruction, and not to be taken literally. In the sphere
of ethics Speusippus seems to have taught that happiness is leading a
moral life, which likely meant for him a median between pleasure and
pain, both of which, according to Aulus Gellius (Noctes Atticae IX,
5.4), Speusippus considered to be evils.
b. Xenocrates
Xenocrates (ca. 396-314 B.C.) succeeded Speusippus as headmaster of
the Academy, and held that post for a quarter of a century (339-314
B.C.), until his death. He departed from Speusippus in identifying the
One as Intellect or Nous, which he also named "Father"; the Dyad he
called "Mother." There is evidence that Xenocrates identified the Dyad
with primordial Matter (fragment 28; Dillon 1977, p. 24), and
considered it an "evil and disorderly principle" (Dillon, p. 26).
Xenocrates divided the sensible universe into the realm above the moon
(the supra-lunar) and the realm below the moon (the sub-lunar). It is
unclear whether he added a further division to include a purely
intelligible realm, or considered the One and the Dyad as occupying
the highest sphere above the stars. Above the moon there exists the
seven planets, which Xenocrates considered to be divine, along with
the stars and the pure fire that is the base element of the universe.
The realm below the moon he believed to be occupied by daemons. He
held a theory that there are two types of gods, Olympians and Titans,
the former born of heaven and the latter of earth (fragments 18 and
20; Dillon, pp. 26-27, also see Zeller 1955, p. 170). Theophrastus,
the pupil of Aristotle, gave credit to Xenocrates for his exhaustive
account of the cosmos, distinguishing him from Speusippus and others
who only provided an account of the One and the Dyad, barely touching
upon anything else besides numbers and geometrical shapes. Xenocrates,
he says, discoursed not only on divine things and mathematicals, but
on objects of sense-perception as well (Theophrastus, Metaphysics
6a.23-6b.9). Perhaps the most important contribution of Xenocrates to
the history of Platonism (and all of philosophy as well) is the
doctrine that the Ideas are thoughts in the mind of the One (Dillon,
p. 29). Xenocrates made a distinction between practical and scientific
wisdom, and taught that happiness is to be found in virtue and the
means conducive to it (Zeller, p. 170).
c. Polemo
Xenocrates was succeeded by Polemo (ca. 350-267 B.C.), who became
headmaster of the Academy upon the latter's death in 314. Eduard
Zeller, in his seminal work on the history of Greek philosophy,
remarks that there is a scarcity of original thinking in the work of
Polemo (Zeller 1955, p. 170). This is unfair, not only because we do
not possess any works of Polemo by which to accurately judge him, but
because if one looks carefully at the surviving evidence, Polemo's
importance for the emergence and development of Stoic philosophy will
be seen. While it is true that Polemo's metaphysical schema was likely
dependent upon his predecessors, with little or no development, he did
make at least two important contributions to ethics, both of which
influenced emerging Stoicism. The first is the concept of
self-sufficiency (autarkheia), which Polemo identified as the key to
happiness. He understood self-sufficiency in respect of virtue, and
not in terms of material wealth or bodily pleasure, teaching that one
could be happy even in the absence of all physical comfort, provided
that one had achieved virtue. The second is the concept of
conciliation or appropriation (oikeiôsis), which was of immense
importance for later Stoic philosophers. The basic presumption of this
doctrine is that all living beings strive for conciliation with their
environment, and that this necessarily involves an existence in
accordance with nature which, for human beings, is a virtuous
existence. There is evidence in Cicero that Polemo taught such a
doctrine, but we have no way of knowing whether he actually used the
term oikeiôsis.
d. Other Important Members of the Old Academy
Besides the headmasters of the Old Academy discussed above, other
pupils of Plato made contributions to Platonic philosophy. The
astronomer and mathematician Philip of Opus, believed by most scholars
to be the author of the pseudo-Platonic dialogue Epinomis, taught that
the greatest wisdom is to be attained through contemplation of the
divine celestial bodies. However, he placed importance as well on the
intermediary capacity of the daemons in this endeavor. Following Plato
in the Laws (896e-898d) he taught a doctrine of an evil World-Soul.
Eudoxus of Cnidus was a pupil of Plato as well as of the Pythagorean
Archytas. He believed that the Forms reside in material mixtures, and
that pleasure is the highest good. It is likely that Plato wrote his
Philebus in response to Eudoxus' theory of pleasure. Heraclides of
Pontus was an astronomer who borrowed the Pythagorean theory of the
diurnal revolution of the earth, and revised it with his own theory
that Mercury and Venus revolve around the sun. He held a materialistic
view of the soul, believing it to be composed of aether, the purest
element. Finally, Crantor of Soloe (ca. 330-270 B.C.) achieved fame as
author of the first commentary on Plato's Timaeus, and for his widely
read treatise On Grief, an early example of the consolation genre of
writing found much later in Boethius. Against the Stoics he argued
that all pain, including grief, is a necessity, and is to be
controlled rather than eradicated (Dillon, p. 42, Zeller pp. 171-172).
He followed Plato and the Pythagoreans in regarding life as a
punishment, and philosophy as practice for death.
3. Skepticism and the New Academy
The designation "New Academy" is intended to represent the shift away
from exegesis of Plato's doctrines and metaphysical speculation,
toward a more sceptical mode of philosophizing. The following two
philosophers are its major representatives.
a. Arcesilaus
Scholars generally consider the "New Academy" to have begun with
Arcesilaus (ca. 315-240 B.C.) who, under the influence of Pyrrhonian
skepticism called into question the idea that knowledge and certainty
is obtainable through sense-perception, denying that even reason or
understanding is capable of arriving at uncontestable truth. In this
he was attacking Stoic cosmology and theology, with its belief in an
eternally ordered universe pervaded by reason. His skepticism was so
thorough that he refused even to declare the validity of his own
sceptical stance. He did not, however, do away with all criteria for
living a proper life, considering perception as linked to the will,
and rational activity as following a judgment based on probability of
desired effect.
b. Carneades
Carneades (214-129 B.C.) followed Arcesilaus in his sceptical
approach, and honed the latter's notion of probability, recognizing
three "grades" of probability involving increasing levels of
validation based on mutual confirmation of related representations
(Zeller, p. 264). Carneades, like Arcesilaus, attacked Stoic doctrine,
especially the idea of "conceptual representations" (phantasia
katalêptikê), arguing that there exists no representation that cannot
be convincingly reproduced by artificials means; therefore, we can
never be certain that the representation we are experiencing is true
or authentic. He likely followed Arcesilaus in the realm of ethics,
adopting judgment based on probability as the guide for practical
life.
4. The Beginning of Middle Platonism
Scholars generally consider the Middle Platonic period to have begun
with the work of Antiochus of Ascalon (d. 68 B.C.), who was
responsible for overhauling the increasingly stifling skepticism of
the New Academy. His teacher was Philo of Larissa (fl. 88-79 B.C.),
who also taught Cicero. We will examine briefly the teachings of
Philo, before moving on to Antiochus. We will then discuss Posidonius
who, though a Stoic rather than a Platonist, contributed much to the
development of Middle Platonic philosophy.
a. Philo of Larissa
Unlike his predecessors in the New Academy, Philo of Larissa did not
consider knowledge an impossibility, although he did follow them in
criticizing the Stoic doctrine of "conceptual representations" as the
key to knowledge. However, he sought not to deny all possibility of
knowledge, but rather to establish a middle course between mere
probability, and knowledge. He believed that there is a level of
obviousness where skepticism must give way to conviction, although
this conviction must not be regarded as absolute knowledge. Philo's
main concern was with ethics, and he used his middle ground approach
to formulate a detailed ethical theory in a manner never attempted by
Arcesilaus or Carneades.
b. Antiochus of Ascalon
The fundamental agreement of Platonic, Stoic, and Peripatetic
philosophy was asserted by Antiochus of Ascalon, who returned to the
basic approach, if not the actual doctrines, of the Old Academy. This
notion of agreement of the earlier philosophers on matters of doctrine
served as a way for Antiochus to get past the skepticism of his
teacher, in order to establish his own philosophical stance. What we
know of Antiochus' doctrines is contained in various writings of
Cicero, usually placed in the mouth of Antiochus' influential pupil
Varro. No writings of Antiochus survive; therefore, as with all of the
philosophers discussed so far – with the exception of Plato – we must
rely solely on reports by contemporaries, near contemporaries, and
later writers. Nevertheless, it is possible to reconstruct with some
confidence the doctrines put forth by Antiochus.
Antiochus, likely for the first time since the advent of academic
skepticism, busied himself with the interpretation of Plato's
dialogues, notably the Timaeus, as the Old Academics had done, thereby
providing us with the first example of what would later become a
full-fledged systematic approach in the later Middle Platonists.
Antiochus rejected the Aristotelian "fifth element" and returned to
the four basic elements – Fire, Air, Water, and Earth – as the primary
material principles of the cosmos. Matter (hulê) is the substrate of
these elements. Following Stoic philosophy, Antiochus taught that the
stars and planets, as well as minds, are composed of the purest fire.
Even god is composed of this fire and does not transcend the cosmos,
but occupies its highest reaches. He combined the Demiurge of the
Timaeus and the World-Soul of the Unwritten Doctrines into an
intra-cosmic, unitive, rational force which he termed Logos. Antiochus
denied that the Platonic Ideas or Forms transcend the cosmos,
asserting instead that they are conceptions common to all humanity,
constructed by way of analogies (similitudines, analogiai), and
existing only within the mind of each rational being, including god
(Cicero, De oratore 8 ff.). Like Xenocrates earlier, Antiochus
understood the Ideas as thoughts in the mind of god (Dillon, pp.
94-95).
With the rise of Stoicism as the most influential dogmatic philosophy
of the Hellenistic era, the problem of fate versus free will came to
the fore, and Antiochus responded by rejecting fate (heimarmenê) as an
efficient cause, relegating it to the class of "material cause"
(aition prokatarktikon), along with time, matter, and other things
that are necessary, but not sufficient, to produce an effect. This
allowed for efficient causes to arise from human initiative, and
preserved the freedom of human activity, or at least response, within
an ordered cosmos.
Again following Xenocrates, Antiochus expressed a belief in daemons,
who inhabit the sub-lunar realm (the supra-lunar realm being reserved
for the divine celestial bodies). He also appears to have believed in
divination, not only through the motion of the celestial bodies, but
by way of dreams, oracles, beasts, and even inanimate objects (Cicero,
De divinatione I.12 ff.; Dillon, p. 89).
While not a strikingly brilliant philosopher – at least as far as we
can tell from surviving accounts of his doctrines – Antiochus is
responsible for articulating themes that would later become prominent
in Platonic philosophy. His notion of the Ideas as thoughts in the
mind of god was accepted as authentic Platonic doctrine by Philo of
Alexandria, who gave it his own unique spin, as we shall see; the
problem of the Demiurge and the World-Soul was taken up by Numenius in
rather gnosticizing fashion, as we will discuss; and Antiochus'
teaching regarding divination and daemons is a precedent of the
Neoplatonic system of Iamblichus (who, due to his later date, will not
be discussed in this article).
c. Posidonius
Although not a Platonist, strictly speaking, but a Stoic, Posidonius
(135-51 B.C.) nevertheless exercised an immense influence on the
development of Middle Platonic thought. Among his many works, all
unfortunately lost except for a few scant fragments, is a commentary
on the Timaeus, which was likely the main source of his influence on
Platonism. Posidonius recognized two principles in the cosmos, one
active and one passive: god and matter, respectively. In this he was
following Plato's doctrine of the mixing bowl, as put forth in the
Timaeus. In his cosmology, Posidonius posited, as did Platonists like
Xenocrates and Antiochus, a bipartite cosmos consisting of a supra-
and a sub-lunar realm. He considered the supra-lunar realm to be
imperishable, and the sub-lunar perishable, dissolving into the void
(kenon) outside the cosmos during the conflagration (ekpurôsis), after
which it is reconstituted anew (this being a variation of standard
Stoic doctrine going back to Chrysippus). Posidonius understood human
beings as forming a bridge between these two realms, and theorized
that souls originate in the sun and travel to earth by way of the moon
(Zeller, pp. 269-270). Some of these souls become humans while others
become daemons or heroes, a doctrine developed in his treatise On
Heroes and Demons, which had an immense influence on later Platonists,
especially Plutarch.
Posidonius believed that the cosmos is held together by cosmic
sympathy (sumpatheia), and this formed the basis for his ideas
concerning fate and divination (cf. Cicero, De divinatione I, and De
fato). He believed the cosmos to be controlled by three forces, Zeus,
Nature, and Fate, and that human beings cannot escape the causality
that is the source of cosmic unity. This led Posidonius naturally to a
belief in astrology, and there is ample evidence that he practiced it
as well (fragments 111, 112, Edelstein-Kidd). He also theorized
regarding other forms of divination, and from his doctrine of cosmic
sympathy arrived at the conclusion that all life and events in the
cosmos are connected, making divination from an animal's liver, for
example, possible. Posidonius asserted the immortality of the soul and
its ability to exist apart from the body. In ethics he largely
followed Plato, teaching that the passions are not to be eradicated
but controlled (Zeller, p. 270, Dillon, pp. 109-112).
5. Neopythagorean Philosophy
During the late second century and early first century B.C. a number
of writings began to appear that were attributed to various historical
followers of Pythagoras. This renewed interest in Pythagorean
philosophy likely grew out of the desire to find harmony between the
three major philosophical schools of the era. The writings
compromising the Pseudo-Pythagorica, as the collection of about ninety
treatises by fifty authors is often called, contain elements of
Platonism, Stoicism, and Peripatetic philosophy, as well as typical
Pythagorean number theory and cosmological motifs, such as the
eternity of the world. There is little, in fact, to differentiate
Neopythagoreanism from Middle Platonism, as one can easily find
Pythagorean elements in the work of thinkers commonly designated as
Platonists, and vice-versa. Following John Dillon in his definitive
study of Middle Platonism, however, I am making the distinction for
the sake of scholarly rigor.
a. Ocellus Lucanus
Of the writings of Ocellus Lucanus (second century B.C.) we possess a
treatise On the Nature of the Universe and a fragment of a lost
treatise On Laws. Ocellus was concerned with maintaining the doctrine
of the eternity of the world against the Stoic doctrine of periodic
conflagration and reconstitution of the universe. Since there are only
two types of generation – from a lesser to a greater state and
vice-versa – Ocellus argued that it is just as absurd to state that
the universe began in a lesser state and progressed to a greater, as
it is to state the opposite, for both statements imply either a growth
or a diminution, and since the cosmos is whole and self-contained (so
he insisted) there is no place into which it can either grow or
diminish. Posidonius' doctrine of a void into which the cosmos
periodically dissolves held no place in Ocellus' philosophy.
Although positing the eternity of the cosmos, Ocellus nevertheless
admitted the obvious, that generation and dissolution occurs here on
earth. Like Xenocrates and other Platonists, Ocellus understood the
cosmos as divided in two parts, the supra-lunar and the sub-lunar, the
gods existing in the former and daemons and humans in the latter. It
is only in the sub-lunar regions, he argued, that generation and decay
occurs, for it is in this region that "nonessential" beings undergo
alteration according to nature. The generation that occurs in the
sub-lunar realm is produced by the supra-lunar realm, the primary
cause being the sun, and the secondary causes the planets. He
apparently did not believe in a transcendent realm beyond the material
cosmos.
Ocellus' work is one of the earliest examples of Hellenistic-era
astrological doctrine. At the end of his On the Nature of the Universe
he entreats prospective parents to be attentive in choosing times of
conception, so that their children may be born noble and graceful; and
in the fragment On Laws he declares that the active supra-lunar realm
governs the passive sub-lunar realm. In his ethical doctrine Ocellus
adhered to strict Pythagorean asceticism, holding that sexual
intercourse is to be reserved for reproductive purposes only, and that
alchoholic beverages are to be avoided.
b. Timaeus Locrus
Scholars are not certain whether the eponymous Timaeus Locrus of
Plato's dialogue ever really existed. In any case, the treatise On the
World and the Soul attributed to this person is an early to mid-first
century B.C. work containing an epitome of the Timaeus dialogue,
though with some omissions. Given the renewed interest in Pythagorean
philosophy in this period, it is likely that the work was widely read.
Though containing clear Pythagorean motifs, such as a table of musical
tones and their respective numbers, and a section elaborating the
geometrical construction of the cosmos, the treatise is, as Thomas
Tobin (1985) has demonstrated, a Middle Platonic interpretation of the
highly Pythagorean-influenced Timaeus dialogue.
According to "Timaeus" the universe has two causes: Mind, which
governs rational beings, and Necessity, which governs bodies and all
irrational beings. Interpreting Plato literally, "Timaeus" affirmed
the temporal creation of the cosmos, and while stating that the cosmos
is capable of being destroyed by the one who created it (the
Demiurge), he denied that it would ever actually be destroyed, since
it is divine and the Demiurge, being good and divine himself, would
never destroy divinity. In what is possibly a later addition to the
text, "Timaeus" assigns numerical values to the various proportions
produced by the mixture of the Same and the Different (these being the
two opposing forces, productive of all motion, growth, and change in
the cosmos, as discussed in the Timaeus dialogue). The substratum of
all generated things is matter, and their reason-principle or logos is
ideal-form. "Timaeus" then proceeds with an account of the geometrical
proportions of the cosmos, finally declaring that the image of the
cosmos is the dodecahedron, since that is the closest approximation to
the perfect sphere, which is the image of purely intellectual reality.
According to "Timaeus," the Demiurge initiated the creation of souls,
but then handed over completion of the task to Nature (hypostatized in
the feminine) who completed their creation and introduced them into
into the cosmos, some by way of the sun, others the moon, and yet more
from the planets that wander according to the principle of the
Different (the source of the irrational part of the soul). Each soul,
however, received a portion of the principle of Sameness, which became
the rational part of the soul. A soul who received more of this
principle would have a happier fate than one receiving less. Here
again, as in Ocellus, we have a relatively early witness of
astrological doctrine within Hellenistic philosophy. The ethical
doctrine of "Timaeus" involved a taming of the passions and the
moderation of bodily pleasures, the final goal being a state of repose
conducive to the contemplation of divine things.
c. Archytas
Several fragments purporting to be from the hand of Plato's
contemporary, the Pythagorean Archytas of Tarentum (though in fact
composed some time during the late second or early first century B.C.)
are of importance for Middle Platonic philosophy, notably the
fragments of a treatise On First Principles where a principle is
posited above the One and the Dyad, out of which the primordial pair
is said to have emerged. "Archytas" places mind above soul as the most
divine part in man, though he departs from standard Pythagoreanism by
assigning the circle rather than the tetragon as the representation of
the soul, since the soul is self-moved (the circle, with no definite
beginning or end point, symbolized endless movement). He believed that
there is a space outside of the material cosmos in which the cosmos is
contained. Time, according to "Archytas" is continuous, not a series
of units or parts as in number, speech, and music, and he apparently
made some distinction between psychic time (pertaining to the soul)
and natural time, though what this distinction entailed is not clear.
In ethics he is no innovator, simply stating the standard notion that
happiness depends on virtue, but virtue is independent of all other
things.
d. Eudorus of Alexandria
Eudorus of Alexandria (fl. ca. 50-25 B.C.) was much concerned with
ethics, which he considered the first subject of philosophy to be
studied. He defined ethics not in terms of existence in accordance
with nature, but rather in terms of striving for a proper end (telos),
which he considered to be "likeness to god as far as possible"
(homoiôsis theô kata to dunaton). This phrase is from Plato's
Theaetetus (176b) where the qualification "as far as possible" simply
means to the extent that a mortal can achieve a divine state. Eudorus,
however, interpreted it as referring to the intellect, that part of
the soul most closely akin to the divine (cf. Dillon, pp. 122-123).
This conception of ethics led Eudorus to depart from earlier
Platonists like Antiochus who considered physical pleasures as
contributing to, or at least enhancing, the happiness that depends on
virtue, and declare that true happiness is of the intellect alone,
although he does seem to have allowed a preliminary role for physical
pleasure in achieving happiness (Dillon, p. 124).
In metaphysics and cosmology Eudorus follows largely Pythagorean
lines, though some Stoic conceptions are present in his thought. He
departed from earlier Pythagorean philosophy and, in a move likely
inspired by "Archytas," posited a supreme principle above the One and
the Dyad, even positing this principle as the producer of matter.
Traditional Pythagorean philosophy posited a primordial pair of
principles, Limit and Unlimited, with no supreme One above this pair.
The monism of Eudorus' doctrine was particularly attractive to the
Jewish Platonist Philo of Alexandria in his quest to square Old
Testament theology with Platonic philosophy.
Eudorus rejected the Aristotelian "fifth element" and followed Stoic
cosmology in positing pure fire as the base element of he heavens. He
considered the stars and planets to be divine, and insisted that the
world is eternal. Eudorus brought together the apparently opposing
views of Xenocrates and Crantor regarding the origin of numbers; the
former stating that they are produced by the One and the Dyad, the
latter that they are produced in the mind of the World-Soul as he
contemplates the Forms. Eudorus taught that number was generated
simultaneously with the World-Soul, who was responsible for
translating the smallest multiplicity (the number three) into solid
bodies (the number four).
Finally, we must note Eudorus' revision of Aristotle's Categories,
which was to exercise an immense influence on later Platonists,
especially Porphyry, who endeavored to find a harmony of doctrine in
Plato and Aristotle. Eudorus interpreted substance (ousia) as strictly
material substance, and concluded that Aristotle's categories only
apply to the physical world, not to the purely intellectual realm,
where Platonists have always located supreme reality.
6. Later Middle Platonism
Notable Middle Platonists after Eudorus include Moderatus of Gades
(first century A.D.), a self-conscious Pythagorean who considered
Plato a mere student of Pythagoras. During the same period Thrasyllus,
Nero's court astrologer, prepared a new edition of Plato's Dialogues,
arranged in tetralogies, as well as an edition of the collected works
of Democritus. Interesting in a different manner is Apollonius of
Tyana, who had the reptuation of a magician and wonder-worker, and is
a prime example of the prophet-figures influenced by Platonism,
Pythagoreanism, and sundry other intellectual streams. Another example
of such a figure is Simon Magus (mid-first century A.D.) who wandered
about working miracles with a prostitute claiming to be Divine Wisdom
Herself. Simon was considered the first Gnostic by the early Christian
heresiologists.
The most important Middle Platonists after Eudorus are Philo of
Alexandria (ca. 30 B.C. – 45 A.D.) and Plutarch of Chaeronea (ca.
45-125 A.D.). Numenius of Apamea (fl. ca. 150-176 A.D.), though more
of a Neopythagorean than a Platonist (to the extent that such a
distinction can be made in this period), had a profound influence on
the emergence of Neoplatonism, not least in the deep and abiding
influence his thought had on the philosophical development of
Plotinus, who was actually accused of plagiarizing Numenius. Finally,
we will discuss Albinus (fl. ca. 149-157) whose handbook of Platonic
philosophy is an interesting example of Middle Platonic eclecticism
(in the best sense of that term).
a. Philo of Alexandria
The work of Philo of Alexandria (also called Philo Judaeus) is the
most prominent and philosophically accomplished example of the
Jewish-Hellenistic syncretism that flourished at Alexandria beginning
at least as early as the translation of the Hebrew Scriptures into
Greek (the Septuagint), during the reign of Ptolemy II Philedelphus
(285-247 B.C.). We already detect the influence of Hellenistic
philosophy on Jewish thought in the biblical book of Ecclesiastes, and
the later apocryphal work Wisdom of Sirach (ca. 30 B.C.) displays
Platonic and Pythagorean affinities. So it is clear that by Philo's
time Jewish thinkers of the Diaspora were quite comfortable with Greek
philosophy. In the work of Philo himself there is an attempt to square
Old Testament theology with the Greek philosophical tradition, leading
Philo to posit Moses as the first sage and teacher of the venerable
ancients of the Greek tradition. The work of Philo was to have an
immense influence on emerging Christian philosophy, especially in the
work of Origen.
According to Philo, God transcends all first principles, including the
Monad, is incorporeal and cannot even be said to occupy a space or
place; He is eternal, changeless, self-sufficient and free from all
constraint or necessity (cf. Tripolitis 1978, pp. 5-6 ff.). God freely
willed the creation of the cosmos, first in a purely intellectual
manner, and then, through the agency of His Logos (Philo's
philosophical term for the Wisdom figure of Proverbs 8:22) He brought
forth the physical cosmos. Philo describes the Logos in a two-fold
manner, first as the sum total of the thoughts of God, and then as a
hypostatization of those thoughts for the purpose of physical
creation. Thus we see Philo linking the cosmos to the intellectual
realm by way of a mediating figure rather like the Platonic
World-Soul. Borrowing a term from Stoic philosophy, Philo calls the
thoughts of the Logos "rational seeds" (logoi spermatikoi), and
describes them as having a role in the production of the cosmos which,
he insists, was brought into being out of non-being by the agency of
God.
Philo adhered to standard Platonism when he declared that the cosmos
is a copy of the purely intellectual realm. However, he taught,
following biblical doctrine, that the cosmos was created in time, but
went on to state that, although having a temporal creation, the cosmos
will exist eternally, since it is the result of God's outpouring of
love. The rational beings dwelling in the cosmos are divided by Philo
into three types: the purely intellectual souls (created first by
God), all animals (created second), and finally man (last of all
rational creation, combining the attributes of the first two). Of the
purely intellectual and incorporeal souls, Philo recognized varying
degrees of perfection; some of the souls aid humanity, for example,
providing guidance and giving signs, while other fell into vice
themselves, and aim to lead man astray. These are the beings called
angels by the Jews and daemons by the Greeks.
Philo's ethical doctrine emphasized the free will of human beings.
According to Philo, the meaning of the biblical statement that
humanity is created in the image and likeness of God is that although
sometimes constrained by external forces, all human souls are capable
of overcoming these constraints and attaining freedom. He further
adds, in a formulation that was to have a profound influence on
Origen, that God aids souls in their quest for freedom in proportion
to their love and devotion for Him and for their fellows.
b. Plutarch of Chaeronea
Plutarch was intensely interested in religion, and his philosophy
bears the stamp of a profound religious piety. Like Eudorus, Plutarch
understood the highest goal of existence as achieving likeness to god,
yet he had little confidence in the ability of human reason to
adequately contemplate and understand divinity, believing instead in
the possibility of divine revelations. Plutarch considered all the
religions of his time as bearing witness to one eternal truth, though
expressed in different ways. His ability to use allegory in order to
prove this assertion is most evident in his treatise On Isis and
Osiris.
Plutarch did not, like Archytas and Eudorus, posit a principle higher
than the Pythagorean One, which Plutarch also called, in Platonic
fashion, the Good. The Dyad was considered by Plutarch as a disruptive
or even downright evil principle, which the One or Monad had to
struggle to control. This tension at the highest ontological level
translates into a dualistic cosmology where the principle of reason is
described as being in constant strife with unreason. The rational
principle, Logos, is both transcendent and immanent. In its former
aspect the Logos is understood by Plutarch as the sum-total of
thoughts in the mind of god; in its latter aspect, Logos is understood
allegorically as Osiris, whose body is routinely torn apart by Typhon,
only to be reassembled ever again by Isis. Osiris' body parts are
interpreted as the Ideas dispersed throughout the material realm, and
rationally maintained by Isis in her demiurgic role as cosmic steward.
Plutarch departed from standard Pythagorean doctrine in declaring the
creation of the cosmos in time. In keeping with his Zoroastrian-style
dualism, Plutarch posited a simultaneous intellectual conception of
the created cosmos in the minds of both the One and its evil
counterpart, the Dyad. Thus we see a dualism at the highest level of
his thought; however, a dualism that is not akin to Gnosticism, for
Plutarch's opposing principles are equi-primordial, unlike the
subversive Sophia in Gnostic mythology, who introduces a disruptive
element into the intellectual realm.
Plutarch accepted the immortality of the soul, excepting only the
notion of transmigration or reincarnation, and made the distinction,
found again later in Origen, between mind (nous) and soul (psukhê). In
the realm of ethics, Plutarch defended free will against fatalism,
understanding divine providence (pronoia) as involving a co-operation
between human will and divine agency (cf. Dillon, pp. 199-203 ff.;
also Zeller, pp. 306-308), another notion later adopted by Origen.
c. Numenius of Apamea
Numenius has been called both a pythagorizing Platonist and a
platonizing Pythagorean. However, the key to his attitude toward
philosophy is summed up in his own statement that "Plato pythagorizes"
(P. Henry 1991, p. lxx). He took the mysterious passage about the
three kings in the Platonic Second Letter as coming from Socrates, and
he likely used this passage as support for the triad of gods which he
posited as first principles. Plato and Pythagoras were considered by
him as the twin sources of philosophical truth, with which the
traditions of the Hebrews, Egyptians, the Zoroastrian Magi, and even
the Brahmins were all in agreement.
Numenius' triad of gods begins with the First God, called also the
Good, who is eternal, immutable, and at rest, concerned only with the
intellectual realm. He is likened by Numenius to the owner of a farm
who, after having sown the fields, leaves it up to his farmhands to
cultivate the crops. The Second God, called Mind and Demiurge is
responsible for translating the things of the intellectual realm to
the realm of matter, thereby establishing a cosmos. In this capacity
the Second God is called World-Soul. However, once this Soul comes
into contact with matter, the source of all evil according to
Numenius, it becomes divided into a rational and an irrational part,
the former remaining in contemplation of the divine realm, and the
latter immersing itself in the material realm. It is not clear whether
Numenius intended to posit two World-Souls (one good, one evil) or if
he had in mind simply a division within that Soul of an irrational and
a rational part. If Numenius' triad involves a strict separation of
three distinct divinities (and this is a matter of interpretation)
then we should speak of a separate World-Soul that is evil. If the
triad is intended to imply a three-fold series of activities emanating
from the divine realm, then we are correct in assuming that Numenius
posited a single World-Soul with two warring parts. Due to the
fragmentary nature of his surviving writings, however, it is
impossible to know for sure what he intended.
Human souls were described by Numenius as divine fragments of the
Demiurge, each one a microcosm of both the intellectual and the
physical realm (Tripolitis, pp. 26-30). He taught that all souls
contain both a rational and an irrational element, the former derived
from the Second God, the latter from association with the material
realm. Numenius taught that souls enter the cosmos by way of the
Tropic of Cancer, acquiring various characteristics as they pass
through the seven planetary spheres. The soul that leads a virtuous
life – which for Numenius meant living a contemplative life detached
from bodily things – will re-ascend to heaven (the sphere of the fixed
stars) by way of the Tropic of Capricorn. The soul that fails to lead
a correct life will enter Hades (located by Numenius in the mists
above the world) where it will undergo chastisement until reincarnated
in another body suitable to its nature. Numenius taught that certain
souls may become so corrupted that they will enter the bodies of
animals. In a doctrine that likely influenced Origen (in his doctrine
of multiple ages), Numenius taught that the series of reincarnations
are finite, and will eventually lead the soul back to the divine
realm, though how this is accomplished for a soul existing in animal
bodies is not entirely clear, since such a soul is presumably not
susceptible to any rational exhortations to virtue.
No overtly ethical fragments of Numenius' works survive, but we do
know that he considered existence in this realm a struggle, with the
irrational part of the soul in constant strife with the rational.
Salvation from this state only takes place when the soul leaves the
material realm for the divine. One is reminded of St. Paul's lament in
Romans 7:18-23 where he describes the war taking place between his
flesh (body, matter) and his mind. His mind knows the good, he says,
but his flesh continually prevents him from achieving this good. It is
possible that Numenius read St. Paul, but more likely that the two
thinkers simply were responding to a shared intellectual milieu
consisting not only of Platonic philosophy, but Gnostic and Hermetic
doctrines as well.
The influence of Numenius extended well beyond his life-time; his
doctrines are recorded in the writings of later Neoplatonists like
Porphyry and Proclus, and Plotinus himself was at one point accused of
plagiarizing Numenius (Porphyry, Life of Plotinus 17). In the case of
Plotinus, we see a clear Numenian influence regarding the triadic
arrangement of principles, although Plotinus developed this basic
notion in a quite original way. Plotinus also responded to Numenius'
doctrine of an evil World-Soul, developing in the process a quite
sophisticated doctrine concerning matter and the nature of evil.
d. Albinus
Albinus (fl. ca. 149-157) left behind two complete works, excellent
sources of first-century A.D. Platonism, the Isagogê (an introduction
to Platonic philosophy) and the Didaskalikos (a summary of Plato's
philosophy). As an interpreter of Plato, Albinus relied heavily on
Aristotle and, to a lesser extent, Stoicism. Like Numenius, Albinus
posited a triadic set of principles: First God (also Mind and Good),
Second God or Universal Intellect, and World-Soul. The First God is
not described as creating the others, but rather as generating them
from his mind as he thinks upon his own thoughts (cf. Tripolitis, pp.
31-36). This conception of divine emanation is present later in the
philosophy of Plotinus and, in a more developed fashion, in Proclus.
The First God is described along the lines of Aristotle's Unmoved
Mover, and is said to produce motion through the desire he inspires in
the second and third gods. Albinus employs negative or apophatic
language when describing the First God, a method of theologizing that
would become of immense importance for later Christian Neoplatonists,
especially Pseudo-Dionysius.
Individual human souls, according to Albinus, were created in the same
manner as the second and third gods, that is, by a hypostatization of
thoughts in the divine mind. Once generated, the souls enter the
sphere of the fixed stars, where each soul is allotted its own star
and set in a chariot or vehicle (okhêma). Following the myth of the
soul in the Phaedrus, Albinus states that the duty of the soul in the
material realm is to place unreason in subjection to reason, and to
steer one's chariot to the rim of heaven where one's allotted star is
waiting to receive the perfected soul.
Although Albinus describes the life of the soul as one of constant
strife between the rational and the irrational parts, he does not
posit, as did Numenius, an evil World-Soul, nor does he totally
degrade all material embodiment as the source of evil. Albinus
described the union of body and soul as akin to that of fire and
asphalt, meaning that the one is the vehicle of the other. In the
realm of ethics Albinus held the by-now-standard Platonic line of
"likeness to god" as the highest goal of existence. He taught a
doctrine of reincarnation including the entrance of the soul into
animal bodies. As in Numenius, it is unclear how souls, once so
incarnated, will ever attain to the reason requisite for salvation
(cf. R.E. Witt 1937, p. 139).
Albinus anticipated Plotinus in the prime role he allotted to
contemplation in the ideal existence of the soul, and Origen in his
doctrine of the intellectual generation of souls by the godhead.
7. "Esoteric" Platonism
This final section will be devoted to a brief discussion of a branch
or offshoot of Middle Platonic thought that I hesitantly labelled
"esoteric," in spite of the fact that these schools of thought or
sects (or whatever one should call them) were quite widespread during
this period, Gnosticism especially. However, though widespread, they
were veiled in mystery and secrecy, leading John Dillon to refer to
them in the perhaps more apt phrase "the Platonic Underworld." We will
be discussing three examples of this "underworld": Hermeticism,
Gnosticism, and the Chaldaean Oracles. The writings comprising the
Corpus Hermeticum, so-called because of its supposed derivation from
the teachings of the legendary sage Hermes Trismegistus, bear the
marks of a variety of philosophies, Platonism and Neopythagoreanism
being the most prominent. Hermetic ideas are found in Christianity as
early as the writings of St. Paul, and Gnostic elements are to be
discerned in John's Gospel as well as in Paul. The earliest Christian
theologians were Gnostics, and the most prominent among them,
Valentinus, nearly became pope. The systems of the Gnostics,
especially Valentinus, attempted (among other things) to solve certain
problems of Platonic and related philosophies by employing
mythological language, astrological symbolism, and elements of alchemy
and ritual magic. Finally, the Chaldaean Oracles, a mysterious
composition melding Platonic and Neopythagorean philosophy with a
revelatory religiosity, was a major source of inspiration for later
Neoplatonists.
a. Hermeticism
Hermeticism is a loose label for collections of texts on various
subjects bearing the name Hermes Trismegistus, "Thrice-great Hermes,"
who was believed to have been a sage of remote antiquity. According to
the third-century B.C. historian Manetho of Sebennytos, a tradition
existed in which Thoth-Hermes was said to have written down his
teachings on tablets before the Flood. These tablets were said to be
kept by the Egyptian priests, who later translated them into Greek.
The earliest Hermetic writings are called the "technical Hermetica"
and can be dated back to the early- to mid-second century B.C. These
texts contain astrological material and information on the magical
properties of gems. The co-called "philosophical Hermetica," that is,
the treatises comprising what today is called the Corpus Hermeticum,
began to be written down a bit later, the earliest probably in the
mid-first century B.C.
The most important treatise in this collection (at least for the
history of Platonism) is the Poimandres. This text begins with the
appearance of Poimandres (a name suggesting "Shepherd of Men" in
Greek), the Divine Intellect, who reveals to the unknown author of the
text a vision displaying the generation of the cosmos. The cosmos is
described as beginning with a darkness coiling downward from the light
(the intellectual realm) like a snake. It is at first indiscernible
and disturbing, but then divine reason descends upon it and imposes
order, and the earth comes into being. This account is dependent on
both Plato's Timaeus and the book of Genesis (especially as these two
works were interpreted by Philo, whom our author likely read). The
image of the descending darkness implies an evil or irrational
principle, or World-Soul, as in Numenius, that must be brought under
control by reason. Other affinities with Numenius, as well as Albinus,
include the direct generation of souls by the Demiurge, and the
descent and ascent of souls through the planetary spheres. One
important difference is that both Numenius and Albinus considered the
highest attainment of the soul as "likeness to god." The Poimandres,
however, declares that the souls who make the ascent to the divine
realm actually become gods themselves, an idea that was to become
central in the Eastern Orthodox Christian tradition, with its concept
of deification or theôsis. It is highly likely that Numenius was
acquainted with, if not the Poimandres itself, another text or texts
similar in content. He was also most certainly familiar with
Gnosticism, to a discussion of which we now turn.
b. Gnosticism
The writings called "gnostic" vary in content, style, date, and region
of origin, to such a degree that certain modern scholars have called
for a moratorium on the term (cf. M.A. Williams 1996). Yet there are
certain basic elements common to most so-called Gnostic systems, as
opposed to stray texts the provenance of which is unknown or dubious.
The most important of these systems is that of Basilides and
Valentinus, two early Christian theologians who are influenced heavily
by Middle Platonic thought. (For a more in-depth discussion, see
Gnosticism.)
The system of Basilides (fl. ca. 132-135 A.D.) begins with the
engendering of Intellect (Nous) by the First (unengendered) Parent.
From this Intellect, Logos is generated, and Logos in turn generates
Prudence (phronêsis) who then generates Wisdom (Sophia) and Power
(dunamis). This is a mythological elaboration of the standard Middle
Platonic emanation schemas that we have encountered in Eudorus and
later philosophers, like Numenius, who have posited a supreme
principle above Intellect. Basilides apparently attempted to "flesh
out" the standard triadic schemas of the more mainstream Middle
Platonists by adding certain anthropomorphic attributes like
"prudence" to the mix. Basilides was among the first Christian
thinkers besides John the Evangelist to explicitly identify Jesus as
the earthly manifestation of the Divine Intellect. He also dabbled in
astrology, revising practices current in his time to suit his own
peculiar cosmology. Using numerology, he identified the ruler of the
celestial realm as "Abrasax" or "Abraxas," a name used in the practice
of ritual magic, the numerical value of which is (according to Greek
numerology) 365, corresponding to the number of "heavens" believed by
Gnostics and other to exist above the familiar spheres of the seven
planets.
Valentinus (ca. 100-175 A.D.) begins his system, in Pythagorean
fashion, not with a unity but a primal duality, the members of which
he calls the Ineffable and Silence. The primal duality produces a
second duality called the Parent and Truth, from which spring a
quartet consisting of Logos, Life, Primal Man, and the Church. As a
Christian, Valentinus held a rather peculiar notion of the nature and
role of Christ in the cosmos, considering Him to have been engendered
along with a "shadow" (matter) that it was His responsibility to
control. Here again we see an elaboration on a particular aspect of
Middle Platonism, namely the manner in which unwieldy matter is
brought under control by a rationalizing force. Valentinus was
apparently the first Christian theologian to refer to the Trinity in
terms of persons, and he affirmed the eternity and immortality of
souls, implying a notion of pre-existence of souls such as we find
later in Origen.
Gnosticism had an immense influence not only on the development of
Christianity but on emerging Neoplatonism as well. Plotinus, for
example, was forced to respond to the increasingly vocal, it seems,
Gnostics attending his lectures. Later, Iamblichus posited a One even
higher than the Plotinian One, in a manner similar to Gnostics like
Basilides and Valentinus who, as we have seen, separated their highest
principles from all others by positing an unengendered parent, and a
primal duality productive of a second duality, respectively.
c. The Chaldaean Oracles
The writings known as the Chaldaean Oracles were very likely composed
by a certain Julian the Theurgist, who served in the Roman army during
Marcus Aurelius' campaign against the Quadi, and claimed to have saved
the Roman camp from fiery destruction by causing a rainstorm (Dillon,
pp. 392-393). The circumstances surrounding the writing of the Oracles
is mysterious, the most likely explanation being that Julian uttered
them after inducing a sort of trance akin to that of the classical
oracles of Greece (E.R. Dodds 1973, p. 284). There is much Platonic
content in the Oracles, resembling very closely the philosophy of
Numenius, which is why they are of interest in this survey of Middle
Platonism.
The metaphysical schema of the Chaldaean Oracles begins with an
absolutely transcendent deity called Father, with whom resides Power,
a productive principle, it seems, whence proceeds Intellect. This
Intellect has a two-fold function, to contemplate the Forms of the
purely intellectual realm of the Father, and to craft and govern the
material realm. In this latter capacity the Intellect is Demiurge. The
Oracles further posits a barrier between the intellectual and the
material realm, personified as Hecate. In the capacity of barrier, or
more properly "membrane" (hupezôkôs humên), Hecate separates the two
"fires," that is, the purely intellectual fire of the Father, and the
material fire from which the cosmos is created, and mediates all
divine influence upon the lower realm. From Hecate is derived the
World-Soul, which in turn emanates Nature, the governor of the
sub-lunar realm (Dillon, p. 394-395). From Nature is derived Fate,
which is capable of enslaving the lower part of the human soul. The
goal of existence then is to purify the lower soul of all contact with
Nature and Fate, by living a life of austerity and contemplation.
Salvation is achieved by an ascent through the planetary spheres,
during which the soul casts off the various aspects of its lower soul,
and becomes pure intellect.
8. Conclusion
It is evident, even from a brief survey such as this one, that the
thinkers comprising the philosophy generally referred to as Middle
Platonism held widely varying and sometimes even divergent ideas, not
only on relatively minor points like the role of physical pleasure in
happiness, but on major points like the eternity of the world or the
number of first principles. A student encountering Middle Platonism
for the first time, armed only with a knowledge of Plato's Dialogues,
will likely wonder why we even call some of these thinkers Platonists
at all. That is understandable. However, it must be remembered that
Plato did not bequeath a set of doctrines on his students and
successors; his legacy is rather a series of problems that have
exercised the minds of philosophers for over two millennia. Platonism,
therefore, should not be thought of a simple elucidation of Plato's
doctrines, but rather as a creative engagement with Plato's texts and
with certain doctrines handed down by the Academy as belonging to
Plato. Middle Platonism ends with Origen of Alexandria and his younger
contemporary Plotinus, both of whom were deeply indebted to many of
the philosophers discussed in this article, yet moved in directions
uniquely their own. It is with them that Neoplatonism begins.
9. References and Further Reading
a. Primary Sources
Albinus, Didaskalikos, ed. P. Louis, in Albinos. Épitomé (Paris: Les
Belles Lettres 1945).
Antiochus of Ascalon, Fragmenta, in Der Akademiker Antiochus, ed. G.
Luck (Bern: Haupt 1953).
Arcesilaus, Fragmenta, in Supplementum Hellenisticum, ed. H.
Lloyd-Jones, P. Parsons (Berlin: De Gruyter 1983).
Archytas (pseudo-), Fragmenta, in The Pythagorean Texts of the
Hellenistic Period, ed. H. Thesleff (Abo: Abo Akademi 1965).
Cicero, The Nature of the Gods and On Divination, tr. C.D. Yonge (New
York: Prometheus Books 1997).
The Chaldean Oracles, tr. G.R.S. Mead (Montana: Kessinger Publishing, no date).
Numenius, Numénius. Fragments, ed. É. des Places (Paris: Les Belles
Lettres 1974).
Ocellus Lucanus, De universi natura and Fragmenta, in Neue
philologische Untersuchungen, vol. 1, ed. R. Harder (Berlin: Weidmann
1926).
Philo of Alexandria, On the Creation of the World (De opificio Mundi),
Allegorical Interpretation (Legum allegoria), tr. F.H. Colson, G.H.
Whitaker, in Philo, vol. 1, Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge: Harvard
University Press 1929).
Plato, Plato: Complete Works, ed. J.M. Cooper (Indianapolis: Hackett 1997).
Plutarch, De Iside et Osiride, in Plutarchi moralia, vol. 2.3, ed. W.
Sieveking (Leipzing: Teubner 1935).
Posidonius, Posidonius. Die Fragmente, vol. 1, ed. W. Theiler (Berlin:
De Gruyter 1982).
Speusippus, Fragmenta, in Speusippus of Athens, ed. L. Tarán
(Philosophia Antiqua 39; Leiden: Brill 1981).
Timaeus Locrus, Fragmenta et titulus, in The Pythagorean Texts of the
Hellenistic Period, ed. H. Thesleff (Abo: Abo Akademi 1965).
Xenocrates, Testimonia, doctrina et fragmenta, in Senocrate-Ermodoro.
Frammenti, ed. M.I. Parente (Naples: Bibliopolis 1982).
b. Secondary Sources
Billings, T.H., The Platonism of Philo Judaeus (Chicago: University of
Chicago Press 1919).
Brehier, E., The History of Philosophy, vol. 2: The Hellenistic and
Roman Age, tr. W. Baskin (Chicago: University of Chicago Press 1958).
Copenhaver, B.P., tr., Hermetica (New York: Cambridge University Press 1992).
Copleston, F., A History of Philosophy, vol. 1, part 2: Greece and
Rome (New York: Image Books 1962).
Dillon, J.M., The Middle Platonists (Ithaca: Cornell University Press 1977).
Dillon, J.M., Long, A.A., ed., The Question of "Eclecticism": Studies
in Later Greek Philosophy (Los Angeles: University of California Press
1988).
Dodds, E.R., The Greeks and the Irrational (Los Angeles: University of
California Press 1973).
Festugiere, A-J, Personal Religion Among the Greeks (Los Angeles:
University of California Press 1954).
Fowden, G., The Egyptian Hermes: A Historical Approach to the Late
Pagan Mind (New York: Cambridge University Press 1986).
Guthrie, K.S., The Pythagorean Sourcebook and Library (Grand Rapids:
Phanes Press 1988).
Henry, P., "The Place of Plotinus in the History of Thought" in
Plotinus, The Enneads, tr. S. MacKenna (New York: Penguin Books 1991).
Jonas, H., The Gnostic Religion, third edition (Boston: Beacon Press 2001).
Layton, B., The Gnostic Scriptures (New York: Doubleday 1987).
Lovejoy, A.O., The Great Chain of Being (New York: Harper and Row 1965).
Tripolitis, A., The Doctrine of the Soul in the Thought of Plotinus
and Origen (New York: Libra 1978).
Williams, M.A., Rethinking "Gnosticism": An Argument for Dismantling a
Dubious Category (Princeton: Princeton University Press 1996).
Witt, R.E., Albinus and the History of Middle Platonism (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press 1937).
Zeller, E., Outlines of the History of Greek Philosophy, tr. L.R.
Palmer (New York: Meridian Books 1955).
No comments:
Post a Comment