The Later Academy and Platonism

doi:10.1017/CHOL9780521040549.005

Chapter 4 - The Later Academy and Platonism

from Part 1 - GREEK PHILOSOPHY FROM PLATO TO PLOTINUS

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 March 2008

Edited by

A. H. Armstrong

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Antiochus and other Platonists of the first century B.C.

Speusippus, Xenocrates, Polemo, and Crates were the successive heads of the Academy. It seems that the successor of Crates, Arcesilaus (fourth/third century), completely changed its character, teaching a kind of non-dogmatic, Socratic, in some sense of the word, sceptical Platonism. This sceptical phase (it continued under Carneades and Philo of Larissa, first century B.C.) seems to have exercised very little influence on later Platonists. A return to dogmatism, from which Platonists from then on never deviated, was initiated by Philo's successor, Antiochus of Ascalon (b. c. 130-120, d. c. 68 B.C.), one of Cicero's teachers. Convinced that the Stoic philosophy was essentially derived from the Old Academy, that Aristotle, in at least one phase of his activity, was a Platonist, and that the Peripatos (which, according to him, originated only after the death of Speusippus), though it modified particularly Plato's ethics, was essentially identical with the Academy, Antiochus incorporated many of their teachings in his own system; and this eclecticism, according to many scholars, paved the way for the Neoplatonic one. But it does not seem that he had any use for the Platonic Two-opposite-principles doctrine. In other words, his return to the Academy did not mean that he returned to all of its teachings.

Where did he stand on the theory of ideas? Speusippus, in some way Xenocrates, and Aristotle had at a certain moment of their careers abandoned it. But Antiochus blames Aristotle for having ‘weakened’ it, and indeed seems to have adopted it. But he did so with considerable modifications. First of all, as he denied any radical difference between intelligence and the senses (despite 30—1 with its assertion that only mens is rerum index, because only mens can perceive ideas; see Lucullus 30: mens ipsa sensus), obviously ideas could not retain their paramount importance3 nor their transcendent status despite the fact that their knowledge was still considered the prerogative of intelligence.

Type: Chapter
Information: The Cambridge History of Later Greek and Early Medieval Philosophy , pp. 53 - 83

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CHOL9780521040549.005 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 1967

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Albinus, ed. Hermann, C. F. in Platonis Dialogi, 6 vols. Leipzig, 1921–36; vol. VI.Google Scholar

Albinus, Épitomé, ed. Louis, P.. Paris, 1945.Google Scholar

,Alexander of Aphrodisias Commentaries on Aristotle, in Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca, I–III. Berlin, 1891–9. Minor Works, ed. Bruns, I., in Supplementum Aristotelicum, II, 1–2. Berlin, 1887, 1892.

Anonymous Commentary on the Theaetetus ed. Diels, H. and Schubart, W.. Berlin, 1905.Google Scholar

Antiochus, Fragments, ed. Luck, G. in Der Akademiker Antiochus. Bern, 1953.

Apuleius, De Philosophia libri, ed. Thomas, P.. Leipzig, 1908.Google Scholar

,AristoclesFragments, ed. Heiland, H., Aristoclis Messenii reliquiae.Giessen, 1925.

Atticus, Fragments, in Eusebius, Praeparatio evangelica XI 1–2; XV 4–12; ed. Baudry, J.. Paris, 1931.Google Scholar

Baeumker, C.Das Problem der Materie in der griechischen Philosophie.Munich, 1890 (reprinted Frankfurt, 1963).Google Scholar

Dittmar, H., Aeschines von Sphettos (1912).

Dodds, E. R. ‘The Parmenides of Plato and the Origin of the Neoplatonic “One”’, in Classical Quarterly, 22 (1928).CrossRef Google Scholar

Dörrie, H., ‘Der Platoniker Eudorus von Alexandria’, Hermes, LXXIX (1944).Google Scholar

Dorrie, H., ‘Zum Ursprung der neuplatonischen Hypostasenlehre’, Hermes, LXXXII (1954), esp. p. 332.Google Scholar

Dörrie, H. ‘Der Platoniker Eudoros von Alexandreia’, in Hermes, 79 (1944).Google Scholar

Dörrie, H. ‘Kontroversen um die Seelenwanderung im kaiserzeitlichen Platonismus’, in Hermes, 85 (1957).Google Scholar

Freudenthal, J., Der Platoniker Albinos und der falsche Alkinoos (1879);

Freudenthal, J.Der Platoniker Albinos und der falsche Alkinoos.Berlin, 1879.Google Scholar

Gigon, O., ‘Zur Geschichte der sogenannten Neuen Akademie’, Museum Helveticum, i [1944]Google Scholar

Jones, R. M., The Platonism of Plutarch (1916) ; 21.

Krämer, H. J.Der Ursprung der Geistmetaphysik.Amsterdam, 1964.Google Scholar

Loenen, J. H., ‘Albinus' Metaphysics’, Mnemosyne ser. 4, vol. ix (1956) ;Google Scholar

Luck, G., ‘Studia divina in vita humana. On Cicero's Dream of Scipio and its Place in Graeco-Roman Philosophy’, Harvard Theological Review, XLIX (1956).Google Scholar

Lueder, A.Die philosophische Persönlichkeit des Antiochos von Askalon.Göttingen, 1940.Google Scholar

Merlan, P., From Platonlsm to Neoplatonlsm (21960) f., 84.

Merlan, P.From Platonism to Neoplatonism, 2nd edn. The Hague, 1960.Google Scholar

Merlan, P.Monopsychism, Mysticism, Metaconsciousness.The Hague, 1963.CrossRef Google Scholar

Moraux, P., ‘quinta essentia’, Realencyclopädie der klassischen Altertumswissensch, XXIV/I (1963).Google Scholar

Nicomachus, Introductio arithmetica, ed. Hoche, R.. Leipzig, 1866.Google Scholar

Numenius, Fragments, ed. Leemans, E. A.. Brussels, 1937.Google Scholar

,PanaetiusFragments, ed. Straaten, M., 3rd edn. Leyden, 1962.Google Scholar

,PeripateticsFragments, ed. Wehrli, F. (Die Schule des Aristoteles), 10 vols. Basel, 1944–59.

Plutarch, Moralia, ed. Hubert, C., Pohlenz, M., etc.: in progress. Leipzig, 1952–.Google Scholar

Plutarch, Moralia, ed. Bernardakis, G. N., 7 vols. Leipzig, 1888–96.Google Scholar

Plutarch, Moralia, ed. and tr. Babbitt, F. C., etc. (Loeb Classical Library): in progress. London, 1927–.Google Scholar

Pohlenz, M.Die Stoa, 2 vols., 3rd edn. Göttingen, 1964.Google Scholar

,PosidoniusFragments, ed. Bake, I.. Posidonii Rhodii reliquiae.Leyden, 1820.

Praechter, K., ‘Nikostratos der Platoniker’, Hermes, LVII (1922).Google Scholar

Praechter, K., ‘Taurus’, Realencyclopa¨die der klassischen Altertumswissensch, v/i (1934).Google Scholar

Praechter, K. ‘Nikostratos der Platoniker’, in Hermes, 57 (1922).Google Scholar

Praechter, K. ‘Severos’ and ‘Tauros’, in Paulys Realencyclopädie. Stuttgart, 2.2 (1923) and 5.1 (1934).Google Scholar

,Pseudo-Aristotlede mundo ed. and tr. Furley, D. J. (Loeb Classical Library). London, 1955.Google Scholar

Reinhardt, K. ‘Poseidonios’, in Paulys Realencyclopädie, 22.1 (1953).Google Scholar

Robin, L.La théorie platonicienne des idées et des nombres d'après Aristote.Paris, 1908 (reprinted Hildesheim, 1963).Google Scholar

Sinko, T.De Apulei et Albini doctrinae Platonicae adumbratione.Kraków, 1905.Google Scholar

Speusippus, Fragments, ed. Lang, P. in De Speusippi Academici scriptis. Bonn, 1911 (reprinted Frankfurt, 1964).

Strache, H.Der Eklektizismus des Antiochos von Askalon.Berlin, 1921.Google Scholar

,the older stoaStoicorum Veterum Fragmenta, ed. Arnim, J., 4 vols. Leipzig, 1903–24.Google Scholar

Theiler, W., Die Vorbereitung des Neuplatorusmus (1930).Google Scholar

Theiler, W. ‘Plotin und die an tike Philosophie’, in Museum Helveticum, 1 (1944).Google Scholar

Theiler, W.Die Vorbereitung des Neuplatonismus.Berlin, 1930.Google Scholar

Theophrastus, Metaphysics, ed. and tr. Ross, W. D. and Fobes, F. H.. Oxford, 1929.Google Scholar

Verbeke, G., ‘Plutarch and the Development of Aristotle’, Aristotle and Plato in the Mid-Fourth Century (1960).Google Scholar

Waszink, J. H., ‘Bemerkungen zum Einfluss des Platonismus im fruhen Christentum’, Vigiliae Christianae, xix (1965), esp. p. 139 n. 21.Google Scholar

Witt, R. E.Albinus and the History of Middle Platonism.Cambridge, 1937.Google Scholar

Xenocrates, Fragments, ed. Heinze, R.. Leipzig, 1892.Google Scholar

Zeller, , Phil. III/I (51923).

Ziegler, K. ‘Plutarchos’, in Paulys Realencyclopädie, 21.1 (1951).Google Scholar