Stephen Gersh Reading Plato, Tracing Plato From Ancient Commentary to Me | Reception Stephen Gersh ASHGATE VARIORUMThis edition © 2005 by Stephen Gersh ‘Stephen Gersh has asserted his moral right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be identified asthe author ofthis work. Published in the Varlorum Collected Studies Series by Ashgate Publishing Limited Ashgate Publishing Company Gower House, Croft Road, Suited20 Aldershot, Hampshire 101 Cherry Street GUII 3HR Burlington, VTos401-a40s B Great Britain USA 395 G36 2005 ‘Ashgate website: http://www ashgate.com ISBN0-86078-969-1 British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Gersh, Stephen Reading Plato, tracing Pato: from ancient commentary o medieval reception ~ (Variorum collected studies series) |. Palo. 2. Plato — Influence 3. Platonists— History ~To 1500 4. Philosophy, Medieval 5, Learning and scholarship — History ~ Medieval, 00-1500 6. Transmission of texts - Europe — History ~ To 1500 Title res Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Gersh, Stephen Reading Plato, tracing Plato: from ancient commentary to medieval reception / Stephen Gersh ‘p.m, -(Variorum collected studies series ; 816) Includes bibliographical referencesand index. ISBN 0-86078-969-1 (alk. paper) [- Plato ~ Early works to 1800, 2. Plato. 1. Title. I. Collected studies ; 816 B395.G36 2005 Ist-de22 2004060791 ‘The paper used inthis publication meets the minimum requirements ofthe American Nationa Standard for Information Sciences ~ Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Mateals, ANSIZ39.48-1984, Gey ™ Printed and bound in Great Britain by TJ Intemational Lid, Padstow, Cornwall 'SSERIESCS816 VARIORUMCOLLECTEDSTUDI Preface CONTENTS Acknowledgements Introduction m The Medieval Legacy from Ancient Platonis The Platonic Tradition in the Middle Ages. A Doxegraphic Approach, ed. Stephen Gersh and Marien J. F. M. Hoenen Berlin-New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2002 Cratylus Mediaevalis~Ontology and Polysemy in Medieval Platonism (to ca. 1200) Poetry and Philosophy in the Middle Ages. A Festschrf for Peter Dronke, ed. John Marenbon. Leiden: EJ. Brill, 2001 Porphyry’s Commentary on the “Harmonies” of Ptolemy and Neoplatonic Musical Theory Plaionism in Late Antiquity, ed. Stephen Gersh and Charles, Kannengiesser. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Dame Press, 192 Calcidius’ Theory of First Principles Studia Patristica 18/2, 1989. Papers ofthe 1983 Oxford Pauristics Conference. Cistercian Publications, Kalamazoo and Peciers Press, Lewven, 1989 Aristides Quintilianus and Martiamus Capella Plato's "Timaews” as Cultural Icon, ed. Gretchen ReydamSchils, Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 2003 79-98 141-155 85-92 163-182vl vit vu CONTENTS Proclus’ Theological Methods. The Programme of Theol. Plat. 1.4 Proclus et la Théologie Platonicienne. Actes du Colloque International de Louvain, 13-16 mat 1998, en U'honneur de HD. Saffrey et L.G. Westerink ed. A. Ph. Segonds . Stel. Leuven-Paris: Leuven University Press, 2000, Proclus’ Commentary on the Timacus, ‘The Prefatory Material Ancient Approaches to Plato's “Timacus”, ed. RW. Sharples and A. Sheppard, Bulletin of the Institue of Classical Studies, Supplement 78. University of London, 2003 143-153 Dialectical and Rhetorical Space. The Boethian ‘Theory of Topics and its Influence during the Early Middle Ages Raum und Raumvorstllungen im Mitelaier. Miscellanea Mediaevalia 25, ed. Jan A. Aerisen und Andreas Speer. Berlin-New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1998 391-401 PER SE IPSUM. The Problem of Immediate and ‘Mediate Causation in Eriugena and his Neoplatonic Predecessors Jean Scot Erigine et histoire de la philosophie. Collogues “Internationaue du Centre National de la Recherche Scienifique, ‘Laon 7-12 juillet 1975. Paris: Editions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, 1977 367-376) ‘Omnipresence in Eriugena, Some Reflections on Augustino ~ Maximian Elements in Periphyseon Eriugena. Studien zu seinen Quellen. Vorirge des I Internationalen Eriugena-Colloqulums, Freiburg im Breisgau, 27-30 August 1979, ed. Werner Beierwaltes. Abhandlungen der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch historische Klasse 1980, 3. Abhandlung, Heidelberg: Carl Winter Universtatsverlg, 1980 55-14 xi xi XIll xv XV CONTENTS ‘The Structure of the Return in Eriugena’s Periphyseon sezrff und Metapher. Sprachform des Denkens bei Eriugena Vortrige des VIL. Internationalen Eriugena-Colloguiums. Werner. Reimers-Siiftung, Bad Homburg 26-29 Juli 1989, ed. Werner ‘Beierwaltes. Heidelberg: Carl Winter Universitatverlag, 1990 Eriugena’s Ars Rhetorica ~ Theory and Practice Tohannes Scottus Ertugena. The Buble and Hermeneutis Proceedings ofthe Ninth International Colloguiuas of the Society forthe Promotion of Eriugenian Studies held at ‘Leuven and Louwain-la-Newve June 7-10, 1995 ea Gerd Van Riel, Carlos Steet and James MeEvoy. Leuver: Leuven University Press, 1996 Structure, Sign, and Ontology from Iohannes Scotus, Eriugena to Anselm of Canterbury. A Reply 10 John Marenbon Medieval Philosophy, ed. John Marenbon. Routledge History of Philosophy, Volume Hl London-New York Routledge, 1998 Anselm of Canterbury { History of Twelfth-Century Western Philosophy, ed. Peter Dronke. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988 Honorius Augustodunensis and Eriugena, Remarks ‘on the Method and Content of the Clavis Physicae Eniugena Redivivus. Zur Wirkungsgeschichte seines Denkens im Mittelater und im Obergang zur Newzeit. Vortrge des V. Internationalen Eriugena-Colloguiums. Werner Reimers-Siiftun, ad Homburg 26-30 August 1985, ed. Werner Beierwaltes. Heidelberg: Carl Winter Universitasverlag, 1987 Platonism-Neoplatonism-Aristotelianism. Thierry of Chartres’ Metaphysical System and Its Sources Renaissance and Renewal inthe Twelfth Century, ed Robert L. Benson and Giles Constable with Carol D. Lankam Cambridge, Massachuseus: Harvard University Piess, 1982 108-125, 261-278, 124-149 255-278, 162-173 512-534xv xvi xix Index CONTENTS (Pseudo-?) Bernard Silvestri and the Revival of Neoplatonic Virgilian Exegesis S735 Sophiés Maigtores. Chercheurs de sagesse. Hommage & “Jean Pépin, Pars: Institut d'Etudes Augustiniennes, 1992 Berthold von Moosburg on the Content and Method of Platonic Philosophy Nach der Verurteiung von 1277. Philosophie und Theologie ‘an der Universit von Paris im letzten Viertl des 13. “Jahrhunderts. Studien und Texte, ed. Jan A. Aertsen, Kent Emery, Jr-und Andreas Speer. Berlin-New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2001 Harmonics and Semiotics in the Middle Ages: Remarks on a Recent Publication a ‘Musik und die Geschichte der Philosophie und "Naturwissenschaften im Mittelalter, ed. Frank Hentschel Leiden: EJ. Bril, 1998 This volume contains xx + 330 pages PREFACE ‘The present Platonic tradition in European thought fro! During this period one can Gounguish an earlier phase, consisting ie work of ancient Greek Commentators who possessed Plato's original works, anda later phase comprising the activities of medieval Latin scholars who, in the absence of most or all of Plato's own works, derived their own version of “Platonism’ from the patristic find secular writers of late antiquity. In order to reflect this historical-textual Gistinction, the volume has been entitled Reading Plato, Tracing Plato. The futhor «will use the “Introduction” below to explain the detailed conceptual framework for the interpretation of Platonism which the nineteen essays collectively advocate, But the main p] location of their treatment might be summarized her s Ontology and Platoni LW, 3 of Being and theory of Language (essays Il, XI, XII, XIII, XIX); 4, Semiotics and Platonism (essays VIII, XII, XVID.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ‘The author wishes to thank the publishers of the various books, confere proceedings, and journals in which these essays originally appeared for giv their permission to republish this material in the present volume: Walter Gruyter (I, VIII, XVIII); E.J. Brill (Il, XIX); University of Notre Dame Press (I V); Peeters (IV); Leuven University Press (VI, XII); the Institute of Classic Studies, School of Advanced Study, University of London (Vil); Les Editions Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (IX); Universititsverlag Winter ( XI, XV); Routledge (XIII); Cambridge University Press (XIV); the Insti Etudes Augustinennes (XVII) ~ XVI is republished with the kind permission Professor Giles Constable, The author also thanks Camilla Gersh for assistance with the preparation of this volume for the press. INTRODUCTION tn writing this series of essays, one of their author's primary aims has been to pasate a reevaluation ofthe status of Platonism within philosophical thought dJorne the first fifteen centuries ofthe Common Era. Its above all clear that two Nidely field assumptions among historians of philosophy ~ that ancient and frodern thought are more significant than medieval thought, and that re in urgent need of re-examination, The numerous historical reasons for such ipeliets cannot be reviewed here. We shall confine ourselves to su Jopic underlying the second assumption s that Platonism itself is a bewilderingly complex phenomenon and, since historians are instinctively attracted towards nations, the temptation to marginalize itis difficult to resist. A necessary first stage in counteracting this tendency is therefore to explain the sinicture of this phenomenon without however assuming any monolithic organizational principle ~ for example, conceptual as opposed to hermeneutic, or generic-specific as opposed to family-resemblance ~ in advance. A study ofthe history of Platonism must pay atertion to the actual process of sion. Here, it is necessary to distinguish the transmission of Platonism Jv ancient text, through a group of writers which iti useful to distinguish conceptually: the Latin commentators and encyclopacdists of late antiquity, and through medieval texts. Within each of these predominantly chronological subdivisions, the material may be organized according to further criteria. Inthe say “Cratylus Mediaevalis~ Ontology and Polysemy in Medieval Platonism (to a. 1200)” (UI), @ methodological division into the wansmission of Plato's Gialogues, the evolution of commentary on those texts, and the tradition of Platonic doxography is proposed forthe study of the medieval period. The Latin writers of late antiquity who transmit the essence of ancient philosophy to the "edieval world may be classified according to their doctrinal allegiances within the general tradition to either Middle Platonism, or earlier Neo-Platonism (of the ore Plotinian or Porphyrian kind) or later Neoplaconism (specifically that of Proclus),! That itis also possible with sct to the medieval period to combine sy XVI pp. 12-13 and passim,xi INTRODUCTION the division according to literary genre with the division according to phases of Platonism in order to achieve a more precise analysis is shown in detail by th essay “The Medieval Legacy from Ancient Platonism” (1). These general studies of the transmission of Platonism in the present volume are supplemented by studies of specific issues. In essay V: “Aristides Quintilianus and Martia Capella” a hitherto unremarked transmission between the ancient and medi intellectual milieux is discussed. Essay XVII: “Berthold of Moosburg on th stent and Method of Platonic Philosophy” deals with the transmission of, particularly important philosophical writer: Proclus. It is argued that since hi doctrine is absorbed into medieval thought in the three successive phases of th ‘ps-Dionysian writings, the Arabic-Latin philosophical compendium known as th Liber de Causis, and actual Proclean translations, it probably represents the pi eminent channel for the transmission of Platonism. In essay XV: “Honor ‘Augustodunensis and Eriugena, Remarks on the Method and Content of th Clavis Physicae” the partially concealed transmission of an earlier medic’ philosopher through a later medieval compendium is at issue. Nevertheless, it would be a mistake to become fixated on the ‘mechanism of literary transmission. In the view of this volume’s author, history of Platonism consists not only of the explicit reading of the various typ Of sources mentioned above but also of the sequential presentation of analogot doctrines which may have occurted with relatively loose textual connections ‘even in the absence of such connections. The loose connection is documented with respect to the theory of Forms in the essay “Structure, Sign, and Ontology from Iohannes Scottus Eriugena to Anselm of Canterbury. A Reply to Johm Marenbon” (XIII), the absence of connection with respect to the theory of language in the essay “Cratylus Mediaevalis. Ontology and Polysemy Medieval Platonism (to ca. 1200)" (I). Tin reading Plato or tracing Plato it is natural that the study of texts will over with the study of doctrine, the authority of an “ism” presiding over the borderlin between the textual and the doctrinal. Two main areas of concer ther ‘become apparent in the present group of essays. The first of these is the questiom of Platonism versus Aristotelianism, since historians of philosophy have already «written much on the controversy among ancient scholars as to whether Plato am [Aristotle should be understood primarily in terms of their opposing doctrines: the view of ancient thinkers like Atticus and Plotinus ~ or in terms of thei doctrinal agreements ~ the view of most Middle Platonists and later Neopli ~ although opposition and agreement interact as very subtle criteria in the case @ 4 reader like Plotinus. Among the essays in this volume, “Berthold of Moosbut ‘on the Content and Method of Platonic Philosophy” (XVIII) draws attention to ai INTRODUCTION xiii tant medieval version of the oppositional reading of Plato and Aristotle. fs Sources” (XVD draws attention to the most notable medieval version of the Spneretistic reading of Plato and Aristotle. At this pont, attention is focused on the possibilty not only of holding the doctrines of transcendent and immanent Forms simultaneously but also of dynamically combining them in the transcendent-immanent notion of emanation. A second area of concern to become apparent in the present group of essays is the question of Pythagoreanism. Inthe past, historians of philosophy have not always brought home to their readers the Gistinction between most ancient and some modem interpretations of Plato ‘according to their respectively higher and lower degrees of Platonic-Pythagorean assimilation — this distinction being quite independent of the modem debate about Plato’s so-called “Unwritten Doctrines.” Among the essays in this volume, “Proclus’ Theological Methods. The Programme of Theol. Plat. 1. 4” (VI) and *Proclus’ Commentary on the Timaeus, The Prefatory Material” (VII) show how fara later ancient Neoplatonist was prepared to go in systematically emphasizing the Pythagoreanism of Plato's philosophical project. According to Proclus, the dialogue Timaeus deliberately imitated the work of “Timaeus the Pythagorean” and consequently reveals a subtle blend of two discursive methods ~ the Platonic fr dialectical and the Pythagorean or iconic ~ which are of the greatest use of theologians. The tendency to assimilate Platonism and Pythagoreanism is almost ubiquitous in medieval philosophy. Thus, another essay presents in summary form the author's general account of this matter worked out in detail elsewhere,” While another essay explores the occurrence of such Pythagorean themes as ‘umerology and transmigration in a “Platonic” commentary on Virgil.” ‘The studies here collected make few attempts to supplement an already nsive literature on the question of Platonic-Christian relations. However, one ay perhaps draw the attention of readers interested in this matter to a discussion Of the tension between emanationist and creationist views of divine causality ; causality in shits De “Per se ipsum. The Problem of Immediate and Mediate Causation in fhiugena and his Neoplatonie Predecessor.” Here, itis possible to observe how notion of selfconstitution which is employed as a determining feature of each Essay xix Essay XVxiv INTRODUCTION successive level of being in the pagan Neoplatonism of lamblichus, Proclus, Damascius is shifted by Christian writers like ps.-Dionysius and Maximus become the exclusive property of God. Tuming now to the study of doctrine in the abstract, we find that Platonisy implies an ontology. Among the components of this ontology is the theory 9 Forms which is presented in one manner in the stereotypical doxographi transmitted to the Middle Ages by ancient scholarship. Here, it is argued there are three principles of all reality: God, the Archetype or Idea, and Matt that these principles are uncreated and incorruptible, that God is the creato neither of the Archetype ot Idea nor of Matter, that God made the world & Jooking towards the Archetype and from Matter and that the world is neith created nor made.’ The theory of Forms is presented in another manner in th creative philosophical developments of which medieval writers were eminen capable, It is argued that Forms exist as thoughts in God’s mind and that ‘unfolds these thoughts into creation, or alternatively that Forms exist as attribute ‘of God and that God transmits these attributes to creatures, the Forms-as-thougl being indirect descendents of Plato's cosmological Forms, the Forms-as-atrib being descendents of the attributes of Forms in general according to Plato or of Plato's moral and aesthetic Forms.’ As historians know well, the theory o Forms combines with the theory of Soul to produce the late antique doctrine Iie thice hypostases: the One (or Good), Being-Intellect, and Soul. The evotutio of this combination can be studied among the Middle Platonists am Neoplatonists of antiquity ~ see the essays “Porphyry's Commentary on i Harmonics of Ptolemy and Neoplatonic Musical Theory” (III) and “Calcidi ‘Theory of First Principles” (IV) ~ and also among certain medieval philosopher between the twelfth and the fourteenth centuries. ‘The ontology characteristic of medieval Platonism has other components. Essay X: “Omnipresence in Eriugena, Some Reflections @ ‘Augustino-Maximian Elements in Periphyseon” deals with the important notid that God has a simultaneously transcendent and immanent relation to things: a development of the participative aspect of the traditional theory @ Forms which had already occurred in ancient Neoplatonism. Essay XIV: “Ansell of Canterbury” deals with the celebrated doctrine that God is the greatest thi that exists or is thought: a development of the paradigmatic aspect of the el theory of Forms which had also occurred in late antiquity. The Stoics played! significant role in both these developments, in the former case by establishing * See Essay I pp 15-16 » See Essay Hp. 85-88 INTRODUCTION wv je sense of immanent logos and in the latter by providing a gly dynam Spc of God in the Frm of an axiom. Inthe case of omnipresence als, the foveal teaching regarding the simultaneiy of transcendence ‘and Bhs Gate Foms i ened by combination withthe Christin sing the perichoréss ofthe divine and human natures in Christ Bost important theme of these essays, and certainly one of the most Gaments may petbaps now be slated on the basis of the concluding item cionice and. Semiotics in the Middle Ages. Remarks on a Recent Publication” (XIX), This theme concems the transition between the semiotic and The ontological aspects of the philosopheme labelled “Platonism” which appears spe nd of dialectic in three phases: the extraction of semiotic elements like tipi and figues fiom the source texts, the expansion of this aspect by Giveloping the similarities between medieval and madern thought resulting from their shared dependence on the notion of relation, and the application of these feats to ontological strctures inthe source texts like the theory of Forms. The ferm “ontology” is used here to denote the situation where 1. real Being is Assumed to be separate from and superior to everyday objects, and 2. this transcendent Being is considered to be the ground ef meaning and of the true- fils dichotomy. Conversely, the term “semiotis" is used here to describe the situation wiere I. the separation and superiority of real Being is neither affirmed tor denied, and 2. the bracketing ofthe transcendent around increases the role of ening and redues tat of he veils dshtomy. This semiotic — wich is similar to deconstruction in being concemed with the exploitation of polysems Bi issecier to deconstruction in not boty Soins to ts subversion of Snioiogy — is utilized most clearly in “Erivgena's 4rs Rhetorca. Theory and Practice” (XII) In that essay we may observe the inverplay of such elements as the unmedioted binary opposition of signifier and signified, of signifier and signticr, and of signified and signified on which the Saussurian model of Snieton is based and ofthe same binary oppositions now mediated by an iment or an ieee ast er whch forms the ai the Pein theory ofthe sign. Ifthe aueton aise whether his lect of tres phases Trescuing a kind of graf of the semiotic onto te ontological was actively Bros by medieval thinkers themselves as well as by ter moder inept, WE itoduce as evidence the medieval tons’ remarkable preoccupation Bir msmonic theory by means of which perhaps miguel the vera conents Num an the real sontents ofthe quadrivium a can be fe i ston between he semiotic andthe onli s sted par Sway XI: *Sttie, Sign, and Ontology from Iannes Scotus Eragena to " of Canterbury. A Reply to John Marenbon." In the earlier part of thiswi INTRODUCTION essay its noted that although the actual equivalent Latin term is not employed Eriugena or by Anselm, the main components of the notion of “structure® determined by moder theorist like Lévi-Strauss and Piaget ~ emphasis upon importance of a relation which is articulated primarily into relation be opposites and relation between whole and parts ~ implicitly dominate thought. With Eriugena, a combinatory of terms nowadays called the “s square” is grafted onto the metaphysical framework provided by the theony Forms in order to produce the doctrine that God or Nature can be divided into not created and creating, the ereated and creating, the created and not crea and the not created and not ereating. Between Erivgena and Anselm, although, increasing popularity of Aristotelian-Boethian logic leads to a more obvi attempt to express theological truths ina propositional and logical rather than non-propostional and semiotic form, the underlying dynamic remains. Thus ‘Anselm, a more elaborate combinatory involving such semiotic elements as plurality of things having property x, the single atribute x, effect of ant effect of itself, the plurality of things having property x through another, and) single property x through itself is grafted onto the metaphysical far provided by the theory of Forms in order to lead to the doctrine that God is first principle of reality, The transition between the semiotic and the ontologi is also studied in essay Tl: “Cratylus Mediaevalis. Ontology and Polysemy Medieval Platonism (to ca. 1200)" ~ here in light of the intimate associat between semiotics and polysemy on the one hand and between ontology ronosemy on the other. 'A further essay dealing with the transition between semiotic and ontol clements is “The Structure of the Return in Eriugena’s Periphyseon” (XI should come as no surprise thatthe climactic moment within Eriugena’s creat narrative ~ where all things return to God having been redeemed through incarmation of the Word ~ is the maximal point of interaction between s and ontology. In articulating this moment, an enormously complex s emerges consisting of binary oppositions on many levels and in vat hierarchies ~ God (1) is opposed to the creature (2); within God the trans (1:1) opposed tothe immanent (1.2), and the initiating to the completing (1 land within the creature the natural order is opposed to the providential (2.12), space is opposed to time (2.4) and the articulation of phases 10 articulation of levels (2.6). The complexity ofthe sructure is further increased the triadically mediated oppositions on the many levels and in the ¥ hierarchies ~ the stability of higher realities (2.21) is opposed to the fluctuation lower realities (2.23) and mediated by the mutual implication of higher and Io (2.22), unity is opposed to multiplicity (2.3) but mediated by unity-in-rmultii INTRODUCTION wi spy ad the return of the ett» Go is opposed tthe “ret” ofthe damned of Pinte by the “Tetum of normal humanity 2.611). The numerical grid der to clarify the structure is, although not explicitly presented deserted here in or Be etival writer himsel, obvioely consent wit his genet Pythagoremn SGontinving with the study of doctrine in the abstact, we turn to the semiotic which Platonism implies ~ this implication being perhaps one of association weir tun ofentailment.* From the viewpoint of wriers whom modem criticism ght place on the chronological borderline between the ancient and medieval Hods, the elaboration of a semiotic takes place primarily within the context of a Mebate concerning the status of different arts of the srivium and of different Components of those arts. For example, there is controversy whether certain Tinguistic features should be placed within rhetoric or dialectic, and whether they should be handled by the part of rhetoric called inveation or the part of thetoric tailed expression, or even whether they correspond to parts of the general art of Thetoric or to parts of some individual rhetorical artifact. Undoubtedly, the Complexity of this situation reflects the heterogeneity of the sources from which the arts ofthe ‘rivium are drawn. However, it also reflects that inherent difficulty Of classifying different kinds of utterance which has continued to stimulate Linguistic inquiry down to the present day. ‘The medieval theories of topics and figures in particular can be understood as repositories of semiotic questions. In the case of topics, it is necessary to inguish a kind of topical doctrine which is not specifically textual from mother kind of topical doctrine which is specifically textual in character. Boethius undoubtedly provides the best illustration of the non-textual approach, Therefore, the esay ‘Dialectical and Rhetorical Space. The Boethian Theory of pics and its Influence during the Early Middle Ages” (VIII) examines his aching in detail by distinguishing among topics which might be assigned Primarily othe sphere of generality maximal propositions ~ for example, "Those Mies whose efficient causes are natural are themselves natural” ~ and ferentiae of maximal propositions — such as “from efficient causes” ~; and mins ‘opies which should be assigned rather to the realm of specificity Glewrstances ~ for example, “who?,” “why?” “how!” and accidents of famsanees — such as “genus,” “contrary.” “greater.” Possibly the best reno ofthe textual approach i provided by Berard Silvestis. The essay evi) Berard Slvess and the Revival of NeoplatonicVirilian Exegesis” therefore examines the manner in which a commentary on the Aeneid is os S8y VI pp. 15-16wi INTRODUCTION based on a set of cireumstances ~ including the “why?” and the “how?” ~ whig are applied within the realm of specificity to Virgil's depiction of the wandering fof Aeneas and to his use of a natural narrative sequence and within the sphere generality to the poet’s account of the course of Everyman's life and to his use an artificial narrative order. The distinction between generality and specificity, Teast in a context dominated by Platonism, can overlap with the distinct between thought and expression. That the latter distinction obtains in the ease figures is shown by essay XII: “Eriugena's Ars rhetorica. Theory and Pract where the traditional dichotomy established within the rhetorical domain of expression into figures of thought ~ patterns which remain intact even if wot ate changed — and figures of speech — pattems which cannot remain intact wi the wording is altered ~ is studied in connection with the famous metaphysi doctrine of Tohannes Scottus. Attention is drawn here to this Pla philosopher's unusually extensive recourse to the figure of example within Sphere of thought and to the figure of etymology within the sphere of expression, twas earlier suggested that in reading Plato or tracing Plato the study doctrine would overlap with the study of texts, and that the authority of an“ ‘would preside over the boundary between the doctrinal and the textual. suggestion acquires a further meaning given that, in examining the ancient medieval Platonists’ handling of the arts of discourse and especially the treatment of the function of those arts both in the textual and in the non-text domains, a kind of hermeneutic circle has been traversed, Therefore Platonists’ own general conception of the transmission of “Platonism” as reveal in their systematic reading of earlier texts is discussed in the essay “Proch ‘Theological Methods, The Programme of Theol. Plat. (V1 (Other essays in the volume examine this textual criticism undertaken Platonic writers ffom more specific viewpoints. Essay VIL: “Proch Commentary on the Timacus. The Prefatory Materia” considers the applica of a highly formalized method of commentary where the unitary aim of an en text is identified, where any text is divided “horizontally” into certain seems and where ths text is also divided “vertically” into several levels. In the ease the Timaeus, the aim is to discourse about nature to the extent that it participa in the divine, the horizontal division being into a revelation of the univers forder by means of images, a description of the universal cosmogony itself, and ‘connecting of the more particular clements tothe universal structure, the veri division being into a quasi-formal level of character comprising a mixture of revelatory and the demonstrative and a quasi-material level of hypothes Consisting of the place and time of the narrative setting and of the dramal personae. But it is important to entend the investigation from ancient to medie\ INTRODUCTION xix seis; by ‘in: Sd Ss Gt 6 Seder Fron studied elsewhere in this volume’ - and to consider not only carmen ho nervy. Ths, cay 1 “he Maton Lape fom fen mem conic two tps ofthe tedeney towards doctin Ace opal of ie ange philsopial writes mal the greta dhe "Onentalzaton” of thet nati. Good examples of Sa cr when Maccins and Fvonus Eales expound the Plata Bazin sl rvough 2 sytemaic reading of Be famous dream of Scipio Be ocites Chro's De Repbic, or wha Macro and Servis acer ee crisoni peycholgy asthe allegra! meaning of he descr io he Seen eee ee, Viol Aeneid VLA purl campo Oreloion Dacor Fimicus Mateus presents his Pisonic conexualzaon of By an ashing euomated byt god Meromy te Eaypten psy Fan Hanis, Pests, and Neckepso, Clearly fo such writers Platnism Taj tccone th universal language of situa texts commentator st STEPHEN GERSH Northwood, August 2004 Esny xyPUBLISHER’S NOTE The articles in this volume, as in all others in the Variorum Collected S Series, have not been given a new, continuous pagination. In order to avoi confusion, and to facilitate their use where these same studies have been refes to elsewhere, the original pagination has been maintained wherever possible, Bach article has been given a Roman number in order of appearance, as list in the Contents, This number is repeated on each page and is quoted in the in entries. The Medieval Legacy From Ancient Platonism ‘rhe beginnings of medieval philosophy, in a textual sense, can be found in the Latin authors of late antiquity. It is therefore natural to seek the origins of the medieval tradition of Platonism in general ~ and of the specific aspect of Platonism which we have selected for study: the under standing of the actual terms ‘Plato” and ‘Platoriei" ~ in the pagan and Christian writers ofthe first five centuries of the common era. For purposes of analysis, this heterogeneous material could be divided up in various ways. The principles of division selected here will be in the earlier part of this essay to consider references to Plato, then references to Platonists in general, and then references to Plotinus and his successors on the part of Latin writers in general; in the later part of the essay to consider references to Plato, then references to Platonists in general, and then references to Plotinus and his successors in Augustine's De civitate Dei. The aim is not to provide detailed philosophical analysis of the material relating to ‘Plato! and *Platonici” in the Latin authors of late antiquity. It is rather to Furnish ‘an inventory of material which may be of service to scholars wishing to trace the evolution of Platonic thinking during the medieval period. Most of the material has probably been described somewhere else. However, its collection into a single brief overview has perhaps not been undertaken hithent, 1. References to Plato The Epistulae ad familiares, De finibus, De republica, and Tusculanae dispu- ‘ationes contain a scattering of biographical or anecdotal details concern- ing Plato.! However, the most important Latin source of the great philoso- Phet’s biography is undoubtedly the introductory section of Apuleius’ De writings of Cicero entitled Brietus, Cato maior, De divinatione, ‘See Cicero, Brus 24 Cot maior Land A; De divination 1 78 Epstulae ad fairs 9; De fib 5,29 and 5,50, De republic 1 10; Tuculance daputatones 1,39 0d4 Platone et eius dogmate.? Here, the author explains that the name Plato was given to the child, previously known as Aristocles, on account of the physical characteristic of a broad forehead. His parents were Ariston who, claimed descent from the god Neptune and Periction’ who was a descen- dant of Solon the Lawgiver, although some maintained that he was in teal ity the offspring of Apollo and Perictione. Plato was born on the day of the month Thargelion which was said to be that on which Latona gave birth, to Apollo and Diana and the day after that on which tradition has cele= brated the birthday of Socrates. Appropriately enough in the case of a fu ture philosopher, Apuleius enters into considerable detail regarding Plato's education. He was first introduced to the doctrine of Heraclitus, later studying with Socrates, encountering the Pythagoreans Eurytus and ‘Archytas, and being influenced by the dialectics of Parmenides and Zeno, He acquired his knowledge of geometry from Theodorus and of astronomy. from a sojourn in Egypt, the realization of a plan to pursue further studies of the Indians and Magi being prevented by war. Apuleius continues his account by describing Plato's own contribution to the development of philosophy. In particular, he articulated in a precise form what had been. sketched roughly by his predecessors, bringing together into a coherent threefold curriculum of study the physics, the logic, and the ethics which had been treated as separate disciplines by the Pythagoreans, the Eleatics, and Socrates respectively. Finally, he munificently endowed the philo: sophical school which he founded in Athens: the Academy. Apuleius" bi: ‘ography of Plato clearly included among its sources a memoir written by the early disciple Speusippus, and probably shares the dependence on this authority and other related or unrelated antecedents with the extant Greek biographies of Plato, These are the fragments of the Academicorum philosophorum index Herculanensis which sre earlier than Apuleius, and Diogenes Laertius’ Life sections of Olympiodorus’ commentary on the Al. cibiades and of the Anonymous Prolegomena fo Plato's philosophy, and Suidas’ notice which are later than Apuleius.‘ In the medieval period, the ‘most complete biographical account of Plato is that included in John of Salisbury’s Policraticus.’ Although this follows Apuleius in many details, it also shows gleanings from a variety of anecdotal sources including per- ‘Aulus, De Plato et ius dogma 1-4 (180-18) 3 Speusipps is quoted by mame te Plato tens dogate 12183) Foran inventory ofthese sources ee AS. Riginos, Patnica, The Anecdotes Concerning the Life and Wrhings of Pato, Leiden 1976 Son af Salsbury, Porat ed © Webb 7,5, 105-107 (64-645, ee The Motiv Legacy 5 », Valerius Maximus, Pliny the Elder, Quintitian, Tertullian, Lac and the scholia on Lucan biography to translations, commentaries, and citations of paps Cicero tantius, Jerome, 2 Turning from pia in Latin writers of late antiquity, we ind a substantial body of infor- mation ih ranslation of the Protagoras by Cicero is mentioned in at least four passages of Jerome,” a writer who expresses contempt forthe absurd doc- Pines of Plato and other pagan authors but claims to be exceptionally well ersed in their Writings none the less. Cicero's translation of this dialogue js also known to Priscian who quotes some extracts in order to illustrate various grammatical points, although it completely fades from view there: after.* Jerome further mentions a translation by Cicero of the Timaeus, de- ‘sribing the latter as an obscure text not made any clearer by the Roman writer's literary talents.” Fortunately this Latin werk is extent, its termina- tion at the equivalent of Timaeus 47b apparently representing the state in ‘which Cicero himself left it. The translation is of great interest I includes @ preface in which the doctrines of Plato are linked with Nigidius Figulus id the Htalian Pythagorean tradition,! and the text itself constitutes such fa mine of information regarding Cicero's techniques of translation that it hhas caught the attention of modern philologists. Besides Jerome, this jon of the Timaeus found an interested reader in Augustine who takes all his citations from Plato's dialogue via the Ciceronian version, However, the work attains only a restricted circulation during the Middle ‘Ages. The most notable example of its use is only the inclusion of some ex: tracts in a florilegium of material from pagan philosophers compiled by the late Carolingian writer Hadoard which consists mainly of passages from Cicero." On the other hand rom the Ciceronian translation by Lanfrane and others go back not to the original text but to Augustine's excerpts, trans For examples of iaton om thse sources See Riis, Pleo me, Epsalae 37, (PL. 2,571), 16,3 P22, 839), versus Rufiam 2,25 (P23 $90 and Prati Pentaho (P28, HDA), Se 3M, Baia Po: ei Mleronymi', Rinses lca 120 (1977), 2 Insiuionesgranaticae 5 8 (ed H. Kel, Granmatet Latin, Leipzig. 1855. can, tn Grammatct Latin, Leip Yo 2 423.5: 6 38 (ed. Rel GL 3226-1) 68 ed, Ke, 2.247, 21 mee os 2,5 (R35, LOA) CP aa 12,40 24490) Sse Schwenk, ‘Des Pesyter Hadoundis Cicer-Facerte’,Pillogus, SupptBand §Cicero's works also abound in citations of the Platonic dialogues, oc- casional paraphrases of arguments, and briefer references or allusions.!2 Among the citations we find the argument of the Phaedrus that soul is im- ‘mortal because itis self-moving,!? Socrates’ remarks concerning the des- tiny of his soul atthe end of the Phaedo,!* and passages from the Apology, Gorgias, Laws, Menexenus, and Republic.!5 An example of a specific ar- ‘gument paraphrased from a dialogue which is cited by name is Socrates? demonstration in the Meno that a slave boy recollects Pythagoras’ theo- rem. Brief references to doctrines in the dialogues without specific iden- tification of the text include one to God's creation of the planetary mo- tions!” and another to the sowing of human souls like seeds into the cos- Given the nature of the work, itis not surprising to find citations of Plato's dialogues in the miscellany entitled Noctes Atticae by the second. century writer Aulus Gellius. This text was extensively copied during the Middle Ages and therefore must have disseminated information about Plato quite widely. As Max Manitius has documented, material from the ‘Noctes Atticae reappears in Apuleius, Macrobius, Augustine, Isidore of Seville, Lupus of Ferritres, Martin of Laon, John of Salisbury, and Peter Helias.” ‘The Gellian citations of Plato relate to a variety of topies. The writer knows that the Phaedo treats the question of the soul's immortality and: also takes from this dialogue the notion that pleasure and pain are con- traries which always occur together! The theory stated in the Parmenides thatthe transition from rest to motion or from motion to rest is not a period of time but an instant is employed by Gellius to answer the difficult ques- tion whether a man is living or dead at the moment of his death»? The 2 For a complete inventory amd stay ofthe passages sce T 1, de Graf, “Pato bn Cicer Clasia! Phology 38 (190), 1815, 9 Plato, Phaedras 24e-¢ a Cicer, Cato mator 78, De republica 627-29 and Tusculanae ddisputationes |, 5355, W Plato, Phaedo I 1Sed at Cero, Tuculnae dsutationer 1, 103. 'S Plata, Apologia 4-424 Cicer, Tusculanae dipustion! 1, 97-99; Gorgias 470847 last Cicero, Tascuanae dputatones 5, 5; Leger 12, 95569560 at Cicero, De legibus 2 84 Menesemus 281e-24%a at Cicer, Teculenae sputationes 5,36; Republica 9, Sle S726 14 Cicero, De divinatone 1, 6081 16 Cher, Tusclanae sputtione 1 $7 1 Cher, Tusewanae pattiones 1,43 CY. De maura deorum 2,32 18 Goer, De lepbur 1,24 1M. Manis, Gescichie der lteinachen Literatur dex Mitelaters, vols, Munehe 191-1931, +, “Geli Gelli, Nactes Ata 2, 18,23 2 fei 7, 1, 6 Pats, Phaedo 60), 2 Geli, Noster Aiae 7,13, 811 ¢ 0, Parmenides 1568) The Masel Legacy 7 alo, Gorgias 5250), 0, 2,12 so, Gorgias 4739, 894, and 508). Plat, Gorgias 84-4850); and Pla, Lege 1, 6373, 1, 6476, 2, 656, and 2, 6716) 20,1‘A translation of the Phaedo by Apuleius is mentioned by Sidonius. Apollinaris who praises Rufinus’ version of Origen by declaring that itis ag faithful to its original as is Apuleius’ rendering of the Platonic dialogue.%* ‘Although the hypothesis that fragment of this work is preserved in ‘Claudianus Mamertus is unverifiable,” itis certain that two extracts from the translation appear in Priscian’s Institutiones grammaticae. One of the passages deals with a philosophically important point: namely, Socrates! project of demonstrating that human soul's immortality.* Unfortunately, the disappearance of Apuleius” translation after the time of Priscian dex prived the medieval world of a useful rationalistic support for an important datum ofits Christian faith, ‘Apuleius was, unlike Gellius, a real Platonic philosopher. Therefore, the citation of Plato’s dialogues in his various writings goes beyond the preservation of miscellaneous pieces of information to the actual concep= {ual elaboration of Plato's teachings. The largest concentration of passages ‘occurs in Apuleius’ Apologia. Here, he cites by name the Phaedrus, the Timaeus, and the Laws? ~ including Greek quotations of the first and last work ~ and without giving titles the A/cibiades I and the Epistulae 2% ~ where the key phrases actually occur in Greek. Elsewhere Apuleius draws) more freely on the Platonic dialogues.*! Because of the writer's own philo= sophical abilities itis often difficult for the modern reader to draw the ine between citations of Plato, reworkings of material from the dialogues in the teachings of Apuleius’ own philosophical mentors perhaps in the School ‘of Gaius, and independent Apuleian contributions. ‘Apart from a few citations in the De die natali by the third-century grammarian Censorinus®® ~ a work which had a relatively limited circula- tion during the Middle Ages ~ the next body of information concerning Plato and the Platonists is comprised by Calcidius* translation and com- mentary on the Timaeus.® ‘The importance of this work as one of the two Sidonins, Episaae 2,9, 5 See). Heaujou Apule.Opusculespilesophigues et fragments, tee abl, radait et com: mone, Ps 1973, 173. Praia, sions grammaticae 1,28 od Keil G2, 520-52. Pluto, Phocdrus bv at Apacs, Apologia 68; Timaeus 82a 86a at Apulelv, Apologia {9.50 Leges 12, 9858 96 a0 Apuls,Apolgia 6. 4 Pho, Alcibiades I, 1216-1224 at Apuleus, Apologia 25; Epistutce 2, 31 at Apuleius (pplogta 8 Charmer 137 at Apuls. Apologia 28 41 Fercnompte De atone et ei dogmate wes the Phaed, Phaedras, ni Timaces: De de Socatis the Sposa andthe paciso Panic Epinomis © See Censorins, De die mal 3,10, 7 14, 12: an 18. 1 ofthis work sce, Gah Adie Paani and var recently © Fora detaled discus The Lain Tradition, Note Dame 1985, vo. 2, ADU. On Calida ee The Medel Lesney 9 does. Reranch Domi on Prove Si lla of Pa Ta, F hensching. Zur Calcsis-Oberieferang, Vigliae Christionae 19 (1968) 42-56 ing 119 MSS ofthe Tuma transition ogee With “ry thee ls ielaing he Bt Phra Canin 10,181810 Of the Good taken from Republic 6,2 the description of intellectual illumis nation as the escape from the cave taken from Republic 7,5 and the classic fication of bodily and psychic motions into ten types taken from Laws 10. On a few occasions, Calcidius cites Plato's dialogues without naming the source specifically.’ It is also to be noted that Calcidius mistakenly, cites the passage from the Theages as being from the Euthydemus* and cites the pseudo-Platonie Epinomis under the ttle of Plato’s Philoso- phus.3* Macrobius’ Commentarius in Somnium Scipionis represents an inter. pretation of the final section of Cicero's treatise on the ideal commons: wealth in terms of the Neoplatonism of Plotinus and Porphyry. During the. execution of this project, the fifth-century Latin writer has plenty of op- portunity to cite Plato, although itis impossible to determine with any cer tainty whether the citations have been made directly from the original text ‘The Phaedo is cited for the notion that philosophy is a meditation uy death, the depiction of the soul's confusion upon entering the body, ant the notion of our varying rewards and punishments in the afterlife.%* Macs robius cites the Phaedrus for the teaching that soul is a self-moving prin= ciple and the Gorgias for the notion of man’s varying rewards and puns ishments in the afterlife. The Republic is cited on three occasions: for the doctrine that the soul must endure many periods of incarnation, the de~ scription of the Sirens as assigned to the heavenly spheres, and the teach: ing of Er’s narrative as a whole. Macrobius cites the Timaeus for the no= tion that the world is subject to periodic destruction, the account of the in= terrelation of elements within the world body, the notion that the indivisi= ble and divided constitute the psychic substance, the analysis of the nus merical structure within the world soul, and the notion that the heavenly, 5 ato, Republica VI SORb-< at Calis, Je Tinacum 242,258.79 5 Pao, Republica VIL Sf, at Calis, a Tisteum 39, MO, 11-14 5 Pato, Lege 10, 893 ft Cals, n Timact 262,268, 19-269, 55 For example, Plato, Sopher 263 at Calc, In Timaeiwr 108,153, 23-28, and Pla sq, Sepa Bde Ck, Tima 132, 18, 51 Calis, Timacam 128,174 and 258,262, 2. 1 ato, Phacdo 64,64, ad 674 at Mate, In Sonia Scpinis 1,13, 8: Phaedo 796 14 Macros, fn Somnium Spine 1, 12,7; Phaedo 11061 He at Macrobis, In Som Scipions 1.1.6, 9 Pato, Phacirus 245-246 at Marois, In Soman Sepinis 2, 15,6, The te of he i logue ot provided © Pato, Gorgas 532a-5264 at Macrobius, I Smmium Scions 1.1.6 1 Pat. Republica 10, 615-0 t Macrols, Je Sammi Sepionts 2 17.13; Republica 10 {rT at Macrobis, n Sonia Scptonts 33; Republica 0, 614h-621d at Microb Somniam Seiptni 17 Te tile of he dialogue na provided in the is and hind pa ser “The Medieval Legacy u a ar Macroban passage is temarkable for the degree of the author's -. ‘stotle against this demonstration drawn from the latter's fhigelatorate confrontation between the two anclent authorities has prob- Bhiy een ited asa unit from some previous Greek or Roman comment for it takes us from the area of etations of Plato to that of etations of the Patoniss. However, « few direct citations of Plato in Latin writers from the end of the aniique period should not pass un-noticed. Ox one occasion, Marius Vietorinus’ Commentarius in Ciceronis Rhetoricam ~ a work which en- {oyed « certain diffusion during the Middle Ages in conjunction with the Ciceronian De inventione ~ explicitly links Plato withthe teaching regard- ing the soul's transcendence. This passage seems o be a loose paraphrase ff certain arguments contained inthe Meno.s However, a more important fextbook in the medieval schools was Boethius’ De consolatione philosophiae: a work containing numerous references to Plato of a some- hat alusive nature, These include: an allusion tothe Gorgias concerning the respective powers of the good and the wicked another to the Meno feoncerning learning as recollection? and another to the Republic con fetning the need for philosopher-kings. With Boethius as with so many ther readers the Timaeus is a favoured source. Thus, we find important Allusions to Plato's remarks about the needfulness of praying for divine sistance, the relation between language and reality, and the perpetuity of os Tinacas 226236 at Macrbins, fh Sorin Scipinis 2 10, 4; Timaeus 3132 at Macobus, In Somntum Seipions 16,28 6,24: and 1, 629-3 — the fr passage docs Bc ae the algae Timaens 38 at Masri, Sm Sion | 126, imaeus 350308 at Macrobies, fx Somnium Sepioms 1, 6.2; 1 6.41, 6 48, 2,2, 1,252,142, 20; and 2,2, 22 ~ the fouth and seventh passage do wot tame the aloe pr a Macrobus, dn Som Spon 1, 20,2. Fo Lepes 10 84-896 a Macrbis, a Smnlam Scipio 2, 15,25 Srbins fe Sonnian Sept 2. 1-18. Gor sla a Boxthis, De consolation phiospiae 4 2, Mf ri Meno Sle at Boetius,De consolation pulsophiae 1 pe 2, 1-14 public 5, 8730 a Boetiu, De Conoltione phieophie 1, p, 4 18-21 eos eee2 the cosmos in this dialogue. In making such allusions, itis the figure of Philosophia herself who refers to “Plato noste’. In the period before the new translations of Plato’s Meno and Phaedg: by Aristippus of Catania in the twelfth century and the first translation of his Parmenides or ofits Proclean lemmata by William Moerbeke in the thit= teenth, the materials assembled in the foregoing pages represent what one right term the medieval corpus of directly-transmitted text of Plato. To summarize briefly: among the dialogues the Alcibiades 1 was cited by ‘Apuleius; the Apology by Cicero; the Charmides by Apuleius; the Epistu: ae by Apuleius — all of these representing isolated recollections. The: legacy of the Gorgias is somewhat more substantial since the theme of rex ward and punishment in the afterlife attracted the attention of Cicero, Gel- lius, Macrobius, and Boethius. The Laws were cited on various topics by Cicero, Apuleius, and Macrobius; the Menexenus by Cicero. The Meno was a more important source for later writers given that Cicero pat phrased the account of recollection and this doctrine was also cited by. Marius Vietorinus and Boethius. The Parmenides was cited on various: points by Gellius and Calcidius. Among the dialogues the Phaedo emerges: as a central text on account of its teachings regarding the immortality of the soul, the nature of its afterlife, and the idea of philosophy as a medita- tion on death which occur in Cicero, Gellius, and Macrobius. A similar im= portance can be attached to the Phaedrus because of its teaching regard- ing the immortality of the soul and the demonstration thereof through the’ soul’s self-motion which are repeated by Cicero and Caleidius. The Pro= tagoras was cited by Gellius on a point of no particular significance. The: Republic seems to have been cited in connection with the widest variety. ‘of topics: these including the political matters which caught the attention. Cf Gellius and Boethius, the central metaphysical analogies of the sun, di vided line, and cave reported by Caleidius, and the eschatological ques- tions which play a role in Macrobius’ commentary. Among the dialogues) the Symposium was cited by Gellius and Apuleius; the Theaeterus by Cale cidius; the Theages by Calcidius ~ these again being fairly isolated remi- niscences. The Timaeus represents the unique case among these sources) since it i cited by almost all the Latin writers and was preserved in at least two continuous translations throughout the late ancient and medieval pe- riods. What ean one say in conclusion about this corpus of directly-trans- mitted text of Plato? Perhaps that some interpreter of real genius coming) © Piao, Timaeus 270 at Boshi, De comtolatione philosophia 3 pt 9, 99-10; Timaei 290 a Bocthis, De. consoatione philosophiae 3, pe 12, 110112; Timaens 378 a Borthias, De consolation pilsophiae 8, p 6,3 The Medieval Lepacy 1B pt era tny-dnaed Panes asa eo 2. References to Platonists The materials coming under his heading may be divided int (a) dxo- rophis of Plato and i schoo" (2 dcusions ofthe history ofthe Pl foie waitin, and) ineextual epproprisons of Patni doting Cicero occupies a leading positon among the doxopaphers of Plato fod anism. In common with may writer of the Helles pero. he Givides the study of philosophy as a whole ~ defined a the love of fnowledge regarding divine and human thing ino tne pars, The ped Boric order of these pare vais for him, being gven as physics, eis tnd logic in the Tusclanae dispuaiones and Laculas and a ee, physics, and loge in the Academica and De lgibus® Evidence in otbet toe sources shows that hs formal partion of philosophy stems rm the eay Academy and emerged asthe onsen fa sto eee ton. Conceming the frst pedagogic onder, Diogenes Larus informs us tht in the east days philosophers discoured aly on physics but at Wo tis study this was later added by Socrates and logic was finaly fed by Plato Concerning the second pedagogic! ode, Augustine in forms us that philosophy was originally divide imo the two branches of tis an py omer aegis ies desl i Sores 4s the later in Pythagoras, Pato then perfected philosophy by unig the two and adding to them logic.” F ahi. Siac he tradition reguding Plato's unique corbin of loge was Probably very ancien, is ikely tht Cicero ls subseribed fot We Sold hse place nde the are of Plo ie Cleat ex tive relerenes tthe eer thay of Forms. Some of thes ic in the ene ht he Roman wer nears he nt petal 1 doctine of ana concepts sing fetminolgy reminiscent the4 more peculiarly Platonic theory: for example in the argument of De offcits ‘where the definition of the good man is sought by unfolding that concept which is wrapped up in our mind and which is also called a form.” Here, the interpretation of the concept as the culmination of a process of defini- tion and the employment of the terminology ‘form’ strongly indicate the Platonic character of the discussion, Another implicit reference is a passage in De finibus which speaks of the wisdom which cannot be beheld by the eye although it would arouse the most passionate love if it were seen7#) Even if Plato had not been mentioned by name elsewhere in the text, the ‘medieval reader would probably recognize the characteristic dichotomy of intelligible Forms and sensible particulars. More explicit references to the theory of Forms occur in a passage of the Academica, two passages of the: Orator, and a passage of the Tusculanae disputationes.” The first of these speaks of Aristotle as the first person to attack the Forms which Plato had established as principles containing an element of divinity. ‘The second and third develop Cicero's notion of a perfect eloquence which cannot be per ceived by the eyes or ears but can at least be grasped by our thought oF mind, this eloquence being an instance of what Plato called the Forms oF Ideas. Regarding these principles Cicero notes that they do not become but exist eternally, that they are sustained by reason and intelligence, and that they underlie the rational investigation of things. The fourth passage immediately follows the quotation from the Mena discussed above. linkit Socrates’ demonstration of the slave boy's reminiscence of Pythagoras! theorem with that existence of Forms or Ideas which Plato everywher maintains, It is obvious that doxographic presentations of Platonic thought, which Cicero is the earliest extant example in Latin, combine Platonis with other doctrines: especially those of Aristotle and the Stoa. In fact, study of late ancient philosophy represents to a considerable degree ‘attempt to analyze and understand the interplay between these vario tendencies in thought, We shall observe this phenomenon in Seneca, in Graeco-Latin doxographical tradition which now survives in only frags mentary form and underlies the accounts of Apuleius and Ambrose, also in Augustine, “The relevant Senecan doxography is contained in two of his Epistull ‘ad Lucilium. In leter 58, Seneca reports that Plato understood “quod est! in six ways: (1) as that which is generic, 2) as that which stands out Cicero, De ofits 3,765 3,81, Cee, De finibus 2 52 78 Clete Academica 33, Orato TH ibd 101; Taseulanaecputationes 1 7-58 The Medieval Lez 1s ges everthing es (2) things relly essing, 4 8 Form, 5) Bap pu th sal see of he ter, and (8 hn which ins gent» tous Est Bice as tempted ote al ese Ho Pints Tmacu” itis Hitely atthe schemes more Bean toni In eter 6, Senec summaries the various views Si iy pllsoper and inldig (the State teory regarding eau es of mater an ease () Arist’ opinion tt there are moe uly, mater teas, fom, and purpose, nd () Pat's een ads te ode to the four Artotln eases BP sar type of cooopapky pmlc ale asiely com be Messe vo ie strc! work of Theoprasts, Inthe soue of its Botton during the Helens perio: a develonen which was recon Bic by some schlal cetectve-work during the nineteenth conry rssnion vo the peeudoPlarchian Plata and Eclogae physiae of pene, is doxography roquired the wow sncretistc format A faking feature of ts presentation of Patonim isthe view that this do: le asignd a cen place tothe iad of principles God, Mater, and Fem: scern which can cerily be elite fromthe Timaeus although fg inesinerpretaion ends to msumtons dere rom or ncompatle jth vat text Among Latin texts conaining this Plone teaching ae Bir's anigutes rerum dinar, Apulcs De Plaine et es dow. Pate, reac’ Adversur aereses, Ambrse'sHexaemeron. Calis Gononenaras in Tina, Avgstine's De civte Det, and Marans apes De nits Phllogiae et Mercuri For students ofthe histo) Gf Pltonism the fats hat several of thse witers wee extremely widely Ted during te Middle Ages and hat sever of thm were Chistans en. Bevan ctason we aided to mht bran or ned ete Standard formulation of *Platonism’. oe fe ‘This impression can be confirmed by ' it can be confirmed by looking at Ambrose’s presentation ‘of he triad im his Hexameron. Having set the stage fora discussion ofthe Semen, Eplae $8,622 D sect Freak Seas Bice San 6S. Das Anas Fsonis Problem, Riches 65,214 gusta Boge Oc, Mile Poni ad Nepl 12%; ites eam dvinaran 206 Carus: Ales, De Plato ea digte Si eas Avera hare 2. M, 37,70: Ambros, Hexameron I SE 2219 alan Tiaras 307, 308, 4308 2 Augustine, De eve Det BINGE B Doman ad, Kalh Tbe 195, CCS. #7210211); Marinos Capel,16 single true doctrine of Moses regarding the origin of the world by describ ing the many discordant beliefs of pagans, he summarizes the doctrines at tributed to Plato and the Platonists with special reference to the following features: that there are three principles of all things which are termed “God? (‘deus’), ‘the archetype’ (‘exemplar’) or ‘the Idea’ idea"), and) Mater’ ‘materia’, “Shn’); that these principles are unereated and incor ruptible; that God is not the creator of matter and not the creator of the archetype or Idea; that God made the world by looking towards the archetype and from matter; and thatthe world is neither created nor made, With the exception of his statement of the triad itself, almost every concle sion drawn by Ambrose’s Platonists is incompatible with Christian teache ing. “Augustine also reports the notorious triad, However, since he associates the teaching more closely with Varro than with Plato, he does not allow it to compromise the more favourable view of Platonism which tends to pre= Vail in his writings. Infact, Augustine's most important doxographical te port makes no mention of the triad. This report constitutes one of those an Swers to questions raised by members of the monastic community at ‘Tagaste later collected in De diversis quaestionsbus LXXXIM. ‘By way of explaining the notion of ‘Idea’, Augustine summarizes the Platonic theory of Forms in language obviously dependent upon Cicero His main points ave the following. First, among the various terms possible they may be called ‘Ideas’ (‘Ideae'), ‘forms’ (‘formae'), or “species! (species), although the description of them as “reasons” (‘rationes’) must ‘be employed with greater caution. Secondly, the Ideas are themselves not formed; they are eternal and more precisely do not come into being or pet= ish; they are contained in the divine intellect; they are immutable and more precisely self-identical; and they are sources of form to transitory things Thirdly, the Ideas are perceived by the soul's rational part; they are pet= ceived by a soul which is pure; they are perceived by the sou!’s eye: and they are perceived by a soul which is similar to them, Finally among eX= amples ofthese Ideas are included the species of man and horse, perhaps together with their individual instances. This last point, which obviously represents a departure from classic Platonism, probably stems from AUgUS= tine's recollection of Ploinus. ‘A remarkable feature of this “quaesto de ides’ is the fact that Augus= tine is intent on providing not only a doxographical report ofthe theory of ‘Augustine, De cvitate Det 7.28 8 Rapotne De avers quaetiontus LXXKIM, qu 6 (ed A. Mutzenbecher, Tarot 19755 CeSt st4, 70°79), The Meal Legacy 7 vin but 0 philosophical justification ofthe tory, This consists on Fey hand o histor argument forthe Form existence in the con- da of major philosophers, and on the other of cosmological argument Fea exstence in the apparent rationality ofthe craton In shor, Au fossine’s account of Platonic teaching moves in te direction opposite to fambeose's vCicoro, Seneca, Ambrose, and Augustine bequeathed the most complete reraphies of Plato and Platonism to later generations. However, one thet not forget the abundance of individual tems of doxographicalinfor- Matin in Latin writers of late antiquity. The interested reader can find Many such details in Gellius, Apuleius, Calcidius, Macrobius, Martianus Eapela, Boethius, Fulgentius, and Isidore of Seville * In certain cases, doxography of Plato and his ‘school” passes over into something more thoughtful: namely, interpretative historiography of the Platonic tradition, This type of discussion has its origin in Cicero's distinc fion between the teachings of the Old and New Academies in passages of the Academica - where the Roman writer describes the Old Academy as the school which he approves ~ of De legibust? ~ where he expounds his doctrine of the state ina relatively dogmatic Old Academic style but then, ina suden moment of doubt, begs the New Academy founded by Arcesi Jaus and Carneades to withhold the ineluctable thrust ofits scepticism — and again of the Academica®® ~ where he describes Varro's reproach of fim for abandoning the Old Academy in favour of the New. The Augus- tinian account of the history of the Platonic tradition starts from this data Provided by Cicero in order to elaborate some startling hypotheses. twas Augustine's own early period of scepticism, described in a well- Hnown passage of Confessiones 52 which forms the background of his farlest Cassiciacum dialogue. Especially in the second and thitd books of ‘hs ues wen ili in te mtb Se Gb, De istrict dba arts A aches duce een Piece lich er er ts (seul: Roloc te Mang espe mbes Sora 2122 aug Cae ey 9 as {rata 6 ll oe Sy ea sae18 this Contra academicos Augustine develops an elaborate argument whi simultaneously attempts to refute the sceptical view that intellectual ce tainty is unattainable and to explain the perceived shift between dogmas tism and scepticism in the history of Plato’s school, the Academy, itse The first phase of this discussion takes place between Augustine and h interlocutors. From this we learn that the Old Academy believed that ce tain knowledge could be achieved with the exercise of careful method, b that Zeno demanded the introduction of a stricter criterion of truth, Ale though this innovation actually strengthened the Old Academic philoso phy, a doctrinal split occurred in which Arcesilaus moved towards com plete scepticism while Antiochus retreated towards pure dogmaticism I the second phase of the discussion Augustine takes the lead in a mor ‘overt manner. Here we learn that the scepticism of the New Academy actually a device for concealing its true theory and protecting it against the arguments of men like Zeno whose motivation stemmed from materi ism, The concealed doctrine was traditional Platonism: the combination of Pythagorean physics, Socratic ethics, and Platonic logic together with th belief in the dichotomy of intelligible and sensible things, all of which hi been revived in modern times by Plotinus. An earlier source for A\ tine’s interpretation of the history of Platonism has not been satisfactorily identified. In all likelihood, this is his own creative combination of reports about the esoteric and exoteric traditions of Pythagoreanism on the hhand and about the dogmatic and sceptical phases of the Academy on th other. ‘Among Latin writers of late antiquity, the only other example of sys tematic historical interpretation in connection with the Platonic tradition concerns the role of Aristotle. The situation here can be summarized simp by noting that some sources describe Aristotle as critical of Plato’s teack ings: for instance Cicero in the Academica refers to Aristotle as undermi ing the theory of Forms; while other sources describe Aristotle and Plat as being fundamentally in agreement: this is the position stated by Aug tine in Contra academicos and Boethius in his Commentarius in De terpretatione. Editio secunda® These opposing views reflect the debat % Augustin, Contra academicos 2,5. UL ~ 6,18 (ed W. McAllen Green, Turnout IS (CCSt. 29, 24, 1-26. 40). 81 hid 2 10,24 (CCSL 29,30, 1-31, 3), 3.7, 14-16 (CCSL.29, 42, 1-8, 70, 3,75 (CCI. 2,37, If) It was of couse he aber Platonism — resend perhaps ina tana (no fonger extant) of Pins ~ which contac the damate philosophical over repoted in Conesines 7, 9 Cicer, Academica 3 9 Rupustine, Contra academicor 3, 19, 42 (CCSL.29, 60, 1-19; Boctins, In De ier fone, Edo secunda 2, 3,79, 180 7. The Medieval Legacy 19 continuing for centuries amonz Greek exegetes and eh had been pers ‘and inspire the analogous medieval controversy documented Pa reo! of Chartres, John of Salisbury, the Alberts, Berthold of Hn eee istognpy fe Panic non ee, iserasaial ale of Pols doce ST eta v6 Gra lash peau sc as Fa nung aden poping Fanon proved Wy We row trp he ili oseton of ler Platonic clements Maco” Commer Bi Trent Choro an ary onos Gti el BI he cor he Weel om lu weet ot sours Mibpicie of it, the dea of th aol iter i ery ino Sadersood adept by intrprctg ita te ligt of Pato pilone Bl nd hat bjeson to Pat's octine ae ama ppc 0 Be Dopo de Sonnio Scipinis of Favoius Eulogiusoperacs ores hc btn to spi gs: the wer o's age and tothe harmony of te spheres” bth of which topes Hg another tend ‘This in its turn Pythasorean numerical theory. Again, the selection of materials for com: Bs MSI, tn Soman Seipioni 15.1 BS wa ois 812.5222. 152,221 las, Dut de Somat Sips, 2 an, 13 Cer, De Rep20 ‘mentary and the manner of commenting on those materials indicate « deci sive tendency towards Platonism, ‘Another example of Latinization is provided by the analogous attempts of late antique writers to expound Platonism through commentary on Vi gil. Although this is a less obvious development of the original text ~ giveg that Virgil’s Platonism is more muted than Cicero's ~ it leads to even m striking results in the cases of Macrobius, Favonius Eulogius, and Servi Macrobius deals with Virgil in his Saturnalia. His primary thesis i thatthe} Roman poet was an authority in philosophy and in all other discipi and, although the loss of the section of the text devoted to Virgil's phi sophical expertise makes it difficult to reconstruct the Macrobian argumer 1s a whole, some idea of the poet's Platonism can be obtained from th mythical discussion of solar theology which does survive.%* Macrobit also introduces Virgil into his Commentarius in Somnium Scipionis. In th cease, the abundance of Virgilian citations in the section of the treatise dealing with the embodied soul when combined with similar bodies of terial in other late antique writers encouraged at least one scholar to posi the existence of an earlier Roman Platonic commentary on Virgil. Fa nius Eulogius has left us with a very memorable example of Virgin P tonism, According to this exegete, when the poet described the windit of the ninefold Styx in the underworld he was, using a mystical and Pi tonic manner of speaking, introducing the nation of a descent from heav to earth on the part of the primary soul. It is obvious that both Maera bius and Favonius Eulogius have focussed their attention on Aeneid 6 ‘They were perhaps both inspired by the opinion of the great Virgil commentator Servius that this book contains so many of the profoundes teachings of the philosophers, theologians, and Egyptians that many hay devoted commentaries to its alone.'®! Servius’ own commentary is also full of allusions to or reminiscences of Plato and Platonism, The Orientalizing appropriation of the Platonic tradition can be noted more briefly. OF this tendency the legend of Plato’s journey to Egypt re ported for the first time among extant Latin writings in the biographi section of Apuleius’ De Plarone et eius dogmate may be viewed as 9% Macrobios, Saturnalia |, 16, [Zand 1,24 The Vigan interpretation of pitosopy tobe lst inthe acu before ibd 3 1, Forte dacouse on soar helogy se bi. I 1 ia © For example, se Macrobis,/n Sommium Scipio 1 1, 10-1. The thesis reguding Roman Platonic commentary was fist proposed by F. Bisch, De Platonicort (uscscnbusqubusdam Versa rin 1911, and as been under scusion ver os we Favonius Eaogius, Dispute de Sammi Sepions 19.46, Motovl Lepiey 2 Sarine which is shared with the Egyptians and Chaldaeans especially in Fete pmicus Materus fits into this category. Here, the writer informs us — 3. References to Plotinus and Other Neoplatonists Among Latin writes of late antiquity we do not find in relation to Plotinus the abundance of biographical or anecdotal details which was ound in connection with Plato. In fact, there is perhaps only one major item: the report in Firmicus Maternus' Maihesis that Plotinus eventually Biecumed to fate ~ whose power he had not suficiently respected in the form of a wasting disease." This piece of information was almost cer {nly derived from the Greek biography of Plotinus written by the latter's SWUdent: Porphyry..07 BE se sen $5 Fimies Mateus, Mares 3,1. 1:4 pol. tas SS Marius Caplin, De maps 2, 204-208, ample at Avge, Confestoner 7, Matis, Mate 7,163 ua Plot: 2. The importance of his text hs been andetined by P. Henry, iden, Furicas aterm, Maras Vetorimar, Sant Augustine es Macrobe alto the refeenes to Ammianus Marclinus2 IF Latin translations from Ploinus’ works were ever made, such vers sions being included among the books of the Platonists translated into Latin mentioned by Augustin in his Confssiones,® they didnot survive io the Middle Ages. However, there are citations of Pltinus in Latin writers of late antiquity who are known have been fluent Greek In Marius Victorinus’ Adversus Arium there is a reference to God as the! One and the All which, together with its surrounding context, clearly fole lows the opening of Potinus’ Ennead 5,2. The pasage is somewhat ison lated in Vietorinus’ writings." Moreover, the actual name of Piotins is not mentioned. But since the Adversus Avium and other theological works of Victorinus influenced Alcuin quite decisively, we have here an impone tant ink between ancient Platonism and Carolingian thought which should not pass nremarkes. More extensive and more explicit citation of Plotinus ean be doc mented in Macrobius. Thus, Ennead 1, is cited by its Porphyrian tide Quid animal, quid homo in connection with the question which human functions are to be assigned to the soul and which tothe combination of the soul and the body. Ennead 1, 2is cited by its Pophyrian ttle De vite tutibus in connection with its presentation of a systematic classification of | virtues. Ennead 1, 9s cited by its Porphytan title De voluntaria mort i connection with the question whether suicide should be permitted or not Ennead 2,3 is cited by its Porphyrin tile Si faciuntasera in connection with its notion of the purely revelatory role of the heavenly bodies. In ade dition, Ennead 2, 2s cited without its Prphyrian tile for is argument that the elements themselves are indestructible, and Ennead 2,2 likewise with= cout its Porphyrin title fr its discussion of the question why the heavenly sphere has a perpetual and cireular motion. Some scholars have wondered whether Macrobius was quoting directly from the text of Pltinus or ind rectly through some Porphyrian treatise, Theie doubts may be allayed by pointing to Macrobius™ obvious concentration on treatises which wore {Lowain 1934, 247 Henry has already provided lui dseusions of much f the materi be discussed inthis section 10 See Henry Poin et Occden, 6M. and P Had, Marius Victorimur, Recherches se vie et ser auorer, Pats 1971, 20116 Se a0 % 155 10 Marius Victorinis, AdbersntAriam 3,22. See Henry, Ploi e cident, 4851; Had Maras Victorinar, 203. As Hadot has extensively demons, Vitrius” Neola ist Potinan bt Popa in carter NO See P. Hace, "Marius Vitrinus et Alvin’, Archiver d’Astore docrinae trae di Moyen Age 21 (195%), $19, and “Les tyianes de Vietorinus et les hyrmes Adeso Misr d'Aleui', Archives Dhinore doctrinal et lteraie du Moyen Age 21 (1960), The Madival Legacy 23 a synitetween Plotinus and Porphyry is relatively unimportant given the holes ‘vact that Porphyry's edition of Plotinus’ writings also included en fc hy Sanius De divisione there isa reference fo Plotinus’ approval of [Andronicus of Rhodes’ dialectical doctrine. This statement is extremely fmteresting because, although it includes Plotinus’ actual name, it does not dorespond with any opinion expressed in the Enneads, Could this be a femnant of Plotinus’ oral teaching? Given that celier commentators are mown to have been systematically studied in Plotinus’ school, it is cer: fainly possible that this is so.t! ‘This small corpus of Latin citations of Plotinus must now be supple- mented by a few references to post-Plotinian thinkers." Porphyry is cited by several Latin writers of the late antique period. Macrobius cites certain Commentarii by Porphyry in connection with an explanation of the distinction between true and false images in dreams!'s ‘and also in connection with the doctrine that the presence of mathematical sirvcture in the corporeal realm reflects the prior mathematical constitution Of its animating soul." He also cites an unspecified work of Porphyry for fan interpretation of Minerva as signifying the power of the sun which furnishes intellection to human minds.!"” Scholars have been active in try- Ing to identify the Porphyrian writings involved. The consensus seems to be that Macrobius” first reference is to the Quaestiones Homericae since the argument involves the exegesis of a Homeric passage, and his third ref- rence to the So! because a strikingly parallel passage in Servius names the Source." This leaves the second Macrobian reference which has been as- Sumed, on the basis of its mathematical and cosmological tendency, to be a Is), Plone cident, 14-62 oncaded, in elton to Macrbiu’ handing of Emaca fi [2 at Porphyry. Senet 3, was an intermedia fy Gosthis, De dion, PL 6, #7S@-8763 i St oa be a en par by Phy of is” ol ching ‘he atrial assembled ins seton one might wish toad the continous But loose Foraphraes of Photinia dctsins in Ambrose, Se P. Had, Paton et Pltin dans os mons de suit Ambrose’, Revue det dudes tines 34 1956), 203-220. Amos Is ‘ly forming an amalgam of Ss from Pato and loa. Bs ueclear whether he as de amalgam from anther scare, In Somnion Spon U3 17 hs, Satara 177. these Macobiansouce questions se P.Courcle, Lat atin Writes and heir Gree al HK, Wedeck, Cambridge, Mas. 196,281 and 3524 citation of Porphyry's Commentarius in Timaeum.!¥ Servius cites twa tteatises of Porphyry by name: the Quaestiones Homericae in his commen tary on the Aeneid by Virgil, and the Sof in his commentary on Virgil’s Eclogues." Boethius also cites two treatises of Porphyry by name: the Commentarius in Sophistam in his De divisione, and the Commentarius De interpretatione in his corresponding commentary."21 Of the Platonists after the time of Porphyry we find merely a few names in Latin sources. lamblichus is mentioned in Boethius’ Commentarius in Categorias, and Syrianus is mentioned in Boethius’ Commentarius in interpretatione. Editio secunda.!® There is, however, the special case of Priscianus Lydus. One of the l members of the Athenian school of Platonism, Priscianus is known to through one or possibly two Greek works and a Latin treatise entitled S¢ lutiones eorum de quibus dubitavit Chosroes Persarum rex. The later is translation of a no longer extant Greek original which was completed at some point between the sixth and ninth centuries and possibly in the cirele of Iohannes Scottus Eriugena.!® The work contains a discussion of the: human soul followed by a series of comments on miscellaneous topics in the fields of psychology, meteorology, and medicine, It is generally res markable not only because of its preoccupation with issues of physical scie tence but also because of its citation of such later Greek philosophers a8 Gains, Alhinus, Plotinus, Porphyry, Iamblichus. Proclus and Ammonius That Priscianus’ treatise exercized a modest influence during the later Midalle Ages is shown by its quotation in the Salernitan Quaestiones phys icales and in the encyclopaedia of Vincent of Beauvais 4. Augustine: De civitate Dei The reports of Plato and Platonism in Augustine's De civitate Dei cof stitute @ unique body of documentation, Because of the authority of writer and the wide dissemination of this work, these Platonic testimoni 1 atone the usng a elena imme op ia 2 lence 78 scan 6 i eo tows Pee ne meri Be 7.5 etna fori Ar SDD a8 pon Be win grat ng in a plo oo roma eat Rte es ete Sis ton 13 ja see The Macnl Legacy 25 ner enttal Stoners bomanrealile ti a coche dope mney oa ms a Eo et of Pato nls «bognpiel clement. Having gers See te pose pope sues Bela Be cng oes ok 10 maser tela ened ee Be ster ly ert ears te Fagor dts Bee tor af my loge in which sear Sore be Ba ve occ nt ol ths own ced arguments bt ao of Bae mons Augustine concen inporantboppcl Beene pel scned nth ever tn. Hebd ogee Pao, Te in Egp in iene oh pope feah An xa ess acre nasa wouctor tvs bei yoete Te anise je ea masa x sclpion a td er ton Be Acgusine was ava tt Pio composed dalogues, ee BI ics ony Scr Wrwhsten bier of ho of tne Bi sx pane, erotics Pn’s Wook om hi By ct sont Soot ive ttle Paco wc sons fo Ihave come via Cicero's Tusculanae disputationes;'2? in another place, Be rcfrcce Pat's samen! ar gods So ot lols Wi BE lycra an oft Scie -asquned by apt Bibnly clog when Aagusine provides cence o avg sued Be eval sere she Tonnes rom is wo he expldy cts te esos of Cod asst jasing te clement fcr aad ie of thea Bien oa four cinema crm of enrees anf edn BB phe x es ming tne ower go of time and he loser Bs vig a ageing bt eo nd fe Highest God a ae Ui or pa of tesa wee lowe ges ke be mortal pr Bh A,, ‘Aveesive, De cntte De 8, 4 (CCSLA7, 219, 119. Bid 8,4 (ccst a 29,1817. Pia SI (OSL 42,227, 1- 228,29) CF Auputine, De dectrina crisiana 24 ant Azesine Decne De 1,22 (CSL, 23, 12-2, 17-Ct. Gee, Tuscan dp ‘Avene, De chtate Dei 9,16 (CCS mA Os 47,263, 12) CI, Apuleius, De deo Soeratis nine, De cate De 8 1 (CSL. 4,228, 2730) (= Po, Tmcus 31) 47,228, 38:38) (= Plato, Timaeus 326) CX ibd 8 18 (CSL 47,232, 40 2.56) Td 9 3 costa, me 1 £7,260 1.3) (= ato, Timaeus 410. Bet (0.31 CeSLa7, 38, 1-309, 11) f= Plato, Fimaeus 41. CL ibid 12,13 (CCS AB,26 of the soul,! and of the world as perfect because it contains every kind of living thing. In the first citation, Augustine names the dialogue and in the fourth he displays a precise knowledge of the text by arguing with cere tain unspecified Platonists about its correct interpretation.°* However, since all the passages cited fall within the section translated by Cicero, there is no evidence to prove a study of the Timaeus in its original I guage. In addition to biographical details and citations of the dialogues, Aus) {gustine’s De civitate Dei presents an extensive doxographical account Plato and his school. Here, we read that philosophy was originally divi into two parts: the active which was practised by Socrates and the con templative which was favoured by Pythagoras. Plato combined these ‘a more perfect study, dividing the whole into three parts: ethical phil phy pertaining to action, physical philosophy whose purpose is contem plation, and logical philosophy which discriminates between truth and fal sity. Although this description starts from the tripartition of philosophy typical of the handbooks, Augustine detects deeper insights. Thus, physi cal philosophy intimates God as cause of created things, logical philosoph God as the light by which things are known, and ethical philosophy as the end to which actions are directed.” Reflection on the deep meaning of the tripartion also underlies Augustine's elaboration on th ‘content of Platonic physical philosophy. His main points are (1) that God) superior to all corporeal things and to every mutable spirit or soul, (2) th every form of mutable things exists in dependence on God who is imt ‘mutable, (3) that in God being, living, knowing, and being blessed 1 ni. 12,27 (CCSL 48, 388, 1-4) 136 thd (CCSL 8,384, 21-38 (© Plat, Tenaeu 30-4 CF id. 920). "35 The dette withthe Paton in the fourths cation iavlves a metaphysical pol of som importance, namely, the diintion betwen tempor {ccs a major deat nthe schools om he gueston whee the naraive of he Tima fol represents tempor ora ida’ seguence of which Avgustine proba in he doxographers 1 tha 4 (CCST 47,219, 17 220,38, The evidence that Augustine derived at east of his kaowiede of Plclsm from handbooks i fay song. OF particular importance Con academicos 2, 2.5 wich scems to provide an autobiographical destin ~ tothe moe famows one in Confesiones 77 ~ of his eoavesion first wo Patni then to Christianity. the forme assge he associates he it stage of his conversion ‘oat from certain “Cesinus Sine fe generally assed tht the ltrs deni tr the"Ceou" whom Auputine describes De Anerestus, pl (PL. 2, 23) a he (for pilonopea eneyeiopoedia in hx Book, would fll that the Plato tee nluenced his fr conversion also iacloded this handbock. On Augustine's wie Uvogrply ree A. Soignac,"Donogrphies et manele das la formation pilosopique d Ssin Aug’, Recherches augustennes 1, Pais 1958, 11-148 1b Be iutte Bei 8,9 (CCSL 47,285 15) Acgustine makes this interpretation mor eM Wid 11, 2 (CCSL 48,344, 17). The Meicnl Lezcy 2” because of God's immutability ~ he must have pro- ing thing could have produced him, supe: ise life is associated withthe intelligible, while body Painted with the sensible ~ the intelligible is superior to the sensible, Byahat because all corporeal beauty is judged by the mind ~ there must Mp incorporcal form, atemporal and non-spaial in the mind. Augus- e's elaborations on the content of Platonic logieal and Platonic ethical losophy ae less extended. Regarding the former, his main points are (1) Frat the criterion of truth resides not in the senses bu in the mind, (2) that is the illuminator of the mind; regarding the latter, that the supreme resides neither in the body nor in the soul nor in the combination but tnGod.” ‘At the beginning of the doxography, Augustine observes that since Plato followed the dissimulating habit of his teacher it is difficult to deter- ‘mine his philosophical views from the dialogues." Ths is perhaps why De ivitate Dei tends to focus on the Platonists rather than on Plato. How- fever, Augustine also reveals some uncertainty in dealing with the Platon- {ts when he applies this name sometimes to the declared followers of Plato fand sometimes to any thinker holding the tenets listed above.'#® ‘The passages in which Augustine speaks of Platonists in the narrow {echnical sense include one where he describes how Plato founded a Philosophical school and Aristotle, who had forme-ly been Plato's student, founded a rival school. During the lifetimes of their masters and immedi Alely thereafter, the followers of the two schools styled themselves “Aca- haves’ Academic’) and *Peripateies" (Peripatetic) respectively. fowever, the most outstanding Platonists are those of relatively recent times who, refusing to be labelled either Academics or Peripatetics, have alled themselves simply ‘Platonists’ (‘Platonici’)."® Another passage ex- Bloiing the narrow technical sense is that in which Augustine contrasts iew of the Platonists and the Aristotelians that a philosopher is af- fess bythe passion bt contol them by reason withthe view ofthe ® thatthe philosopher should not be affected by the passions. In this 8,6 (CCSL. a7, 22, 1-224, 53) we 8.7 SL a, 226 12, as 1 8 8 Ce a7, 4,31 225, 4) jo (8 CCS. a, 200, 38-0). He 35d. 8,1 (CCS 7,217, 4.39) andi, 9 (CSL 47, 25,1 - 26,1 12 (CCS 47,29, 11-30),28 instance, the agreement between Plato and Aristotle is explained by th fact that the latter was originally a disciple ofthe former." Passages in which Augustine speaks of Platonists in the wider sense ar actually more common. They inelude not only those whose content has al ready been summarized abovelS but also those where the agreement bes tween Platonism and Christianity is the theme."# Particularly striking exe amples of the latter are those in which Augustine demonstrates by clo textual analysis the agreement in doctrine between the Platonic Timaes and the Biblical books of Genesis and Exodus.'*” But who are the Platonists whom Augustine has in mind? A passage ready noted lists Speusippus and Xenocrates among the earliest, and Ploti ‘nus, lamblichus, and Porphyry among the latest. Apuleius is also m tioned here: a writer whose De deo Socratis is cited by name and analya at length in Augustine's treatise. Other philosophers discussed inclu ‘Varro, Cornelius Labeo, and Hermes Trismegistus the first two of whom. explicitly labelled as Platonists.4? ‘Stating an opinion which is given in a similar form elsewhere in h works, Augustine argues that it is Plotinus who at least among recer thinkers has understood Plato best. This is one of the reasons why D ivitate Dei contains several verifiable citations of Plotinus probably t directly from the Greek. The explicit references are (1) to Ennead 1, (Porphyrian title: On beauty). Plotinus is associated by name with the n6 tion that vision of God is so beautiful that a man, however blessed he may be in other respects, is wretched without that vision, He is also associ by name with the interpretation of a group of Homeric texts which include) 19 thi, 9, 4 (CCSL 47,251, 8:10) 158 Eapeily id 8,68 (CCSL 47, 222, 1-225, 49) and 12 (CCSL. 47,229,130. Ct ae fa 10,12 (CCSU.47, 271, 1-274, 31). Thee are also some passages in ere wei “Augustine teletng the Patni. See expcily Contra academics 3,18, 41; Epa GitsDe vera religione 2-7, Confesiones 7,9 17,20; a 8,2; Epistle 118, 3.5 the page De beat ita 1 se 150 186 De eivae Dei 8,9 (CCSL 47,225, 1-226 14) contains a strong statement of his men The most famous ofl the passages ini category is Confessions 7. ff. whee ste deseribes the encounter with cera Books ofthe Plaoisstnsited i ‘Shick preciplaed the fist of his two stages of conversion CI. however Reractioner I 1 See eapeilly De civae De®, 11 (CCSL 47,228 SI) CTimaeus 316320, Genesis I 2nd Exodus 3,19) 8 thd, 12 (CSL 42,229, 26.30) 10 For Waco see ib 7,28 (CCSL 47,200, 1528) for Laeo ib. 2,14 (CCS. 47, 45,38 23), 9,19 (CESL 47,267 1-5 for Hermes i. 8, 2:24 (CSL. 47, 29, 1-245, 18h 19 ft 9, 10 (CCSL 49, 238, 12). CL Conta academicor 3,18, and Soioquia 49 (Ger moss reference to lotus nearly Austin s De Beta va 1, (a passage Sertally pales Confssones 7,9 ace my pote 8) On the MS reading Plt (nt tos) nhs ten ce Henry, toi et Octet, 92-94, he Mosional Legacy 29 sqjuncton to fy 10 he fatherland in connection with the soul's return ecenent. Both references ae slightly paraphrased: (2) to En- > (porphyrin ttle: On providence. First treatise). Reference 10 spate Platonist in one of his discussions together with paraphrase of ‘sting that, from consideration of the beauty even in insignifi- ings, one can prove that providence is extended from the highest i to he lowest things in the cosmos; (3) to Ennead 4, 3 (Porphyrian ine soul. First treatises). Plotinus is quoted by name as saying Father in his mercy, made for them mortal bonds”, Although Plotinus Speaks of Zeus-the Demiurge rather than the One, Augustine's is close to the original;!5 (4) to Ennead 5, 1 (Porphyrian tile: imary hypostases). Reference to Plotinus as developing the alo together with extensive paraphrase of a passage stating the being which they believe to be the universal soul and our individ- “gal souls received their happiness from the same source: the light which “created the universal soul, is distinet from it, and infuses intelligence into it. ‘Phe passage further states that rational ~ or perhaps better, intellectual — ‘ou has no nature above itself except the God who made that soul itself ‘and the universe, and that the genus of rational or intellectual soul includes those spirits believed to reside in the heavenly bocies.!# It does not seem “possible to settle the question whether Augustine is reading or recollecting the Greck text or reading or recollecting some Latin translation. However, Henry's reflections that the lost translation of the Enneads posited by “scholars may not have included all the treatises cited here, and that the ‘more mature Augustine's knowledge of Greek is proven by his textual dis- fusions of the Septuagint and his use of philosophical texts probably not AVailabic in translation are strongly compelling if not finally decisive argu- ents in favour of the former hypothesis.55 Augustine is less charitable to Porphyry than he is to Plotinus. Al. thouieh he praises the former for revising Plato's doctrine of transmigration By saying that disembodied souls may return to human but not to animal Bases ine De ate Det 10, 4 (CSL 47, 289,770 (er Pots, mead 1 6,7) and SL. 47, 265,47 (llr Pains, Ennead 1, 6,8) Pe ivr De i 1 (CCS, 28,1118) aie Posina, Ennead 32 13) tate De 9, 10 (CSL. 47, 258-8) (ater Plsins, Ennead 4, 3,1). te Det 10, 2(CCSL 47, 274, 142 alter Pots, Enea S13. Plo et FOecident, 134137. The evidence thai Marius Vicoinys (ansaid Tus shed on Augustine's ow® ep a Confessions 3,2. However, since ht Ps (es tartan of Paton (not a ans of tins), Avge my Dave kyr stematvely or atonal In mind. Mos Vitrnu Own oss 1 rae than Pinan in char.30 bodies, !% he condemns him for following not the teaching of Plato but th of the Chaldaeans in attributing passions to beings.'5” In fact, De civ Dei contains extended analyses of two Porphyrian texts ~ at one point i porting a correction via Apuleius'**~ namely, the Epistula ad An ‘and De regresso animae, Obviously, Augustine has the actual texts of both works ready to hand.’ In the case of the first text, he summarizes th {questions and arguments concerning the metaphysical bases of theu practice which Porphyry puts to the Egyptian priest Anebo, and specu lates on the rhetorical technique of the treatise. Does the moderate tone of his questioning indicate that he is doubtful to what extent the Egypt views are fallacious, ot does it provide a strategy for bringing the Egy} to perceive the errors of his own position?! In the case of the second, ‘Augustine embarks upon the discussion of several complex philosophi issues including one which necessitates a textual comparison of Plot and Porphyry. Here, he tries to discern the meaning of the Porphy teaching that there are three first principles: the Father, the Intellect of Father, and the principle which is both a third term and a mediator betwe ‘agreement with Plotinus’ passage concerning the three primary substa where Soul is placed below the Intellect of the Father. On the other hi that it mediates hetween the Father and the Intellect of the Father.!6 passage is of great interest to historians of late ancient philosophy. only does it cite the ttle of a Plotinian treatise and preserve a fragment the Porphyrian ceuvre. Iti also establishes comparisons between Plott and Porphyry and between both the Platonists and Christian Trinitarian ism 1% augustine, De cvitate Dei 10,30 (CSL. 47,307, 1-308, 65) (This passage asthe femarabl feature of an tere conaction with Virgil) Cr. 12, 27 (CSL. 4 5-384, 20, 1 Th 1, 10 (CSL. 47,283, 1-284, 41), CF. i. 10, 19 (CSL 47,294, 28.27) and 21 (CCSL 47,295, 31-37 Expt session of Porphyry is wll late in the A tin corpus, the east cation ting in De contenu evangelitaru 158 De ciate Det 10,27 (CSL A730, 18) 19 The ile of the fit x que at bid 10,11 (CSL 47, 284,12) and ofthe second at 10,29 (CCSL 47,305, 60-62, Ye fh 10, 11 (CSL, 28, 1-286, 109, "eta 10,28 (COSL 47,296, 1-297, 26, 2 ib 10,24 (CCSL 47,297, 1 298,50. US MEDIAEVALIS—ONTOLOGY AND POLYSEMY ‘IN MEDIEVAL PLATONISM (TO CA. 1200) follows here might be described as ‘a sketch for an alterna- tory of medieval Platonism unfolded under the eponym of Pee Cratylus himself was a famous Heracltean, He is known the character in Plato’s dialogue Cratylus who expounds “ng works and edions have been cited in the course of this essay feof Caserbury: Monel = Mowiagin in S. Anima Obra Om, cd. FS if Seckav-Rowe-balnburgh 1938-61, vol ne: De dal ~ De Diao, ed. B Darrell Jackson, Dordrecht 1975, Se De. cet, LXXXII = De Diss quest’ LXXXIM, ed A. Mutzenbecher Turbout 1975 De Dor: Cr. ~ De Docrina Cristiana ed. J. Marin CCSL 32), Turmhout 1962 De Maz ~ De Magis, ed, W. M. Greci (CCSL 29), Turnhout 1970, rb Silvestri: da Mare Cap. = The Commeiery on Martinus Capla’s De Naps ‘t Moruri alle to Romande Sei. H. Westra, Toronto, 1986 Bouts, The Theologica’ Tracas, ed, and ans Rand, Cambridge, MA 1918, 1 = Ie Lago Paphyri: Comments, Ei Prima, ed. G. Schepss and 148), Vienna 1906, ws tn Tim. = Tamas 2 Calcio Trnslatus Commanariogue Instat, BE Mast tendon ant Leen 1962 bald of Arras: Trace. sper De Trin, = Tracts sper De Tritate Bai in Tio Ws Clem of Ars, by N. Hain, Toronto 165, PBeiess: Ai. in Mort. Annotations in Marit, ed. C. Lat, Cambri mens ar. = Mariana, ea. C, Late, Cambridge, tt = Petlosen, PL 122, Pars 1858 (bs. I-V, ed 1. Sheldon Wiliams, ‘0-81 (bis. THD, E,Jeauneau, Dublin 1995 (ok 1V}, and E. Jeauneat ON 1612, Tumour 1996-7 (ks FI. ng, ("4 Pes De Di. Nom. = Vaso eprom Dion, De Dicis Newinias, PL BRT, oS. Victor: Unie Cap Sit: = De Unione Cpr Spinins, PL 177 Fb See's, Seville: gm Epmolga, ed. W. Lindsay, Oxford 1911. Tay Siton. = “lbs Thoda Marcobi Satna, ed. J. Willis, Leipaig Didavatcon, eC. Buttimer, Washington, DC 1939. Fale Sonn, DW TE 5 Ante Tht Marit Comment x Soi Spins, Leipaig 1970,80 ‘The possible methodological approaches to the history of medi Platonism can be understood by constructing a typology where main division consists of the ‘textual’ and the ‘doctrinal’. The tual approach to the phenomenon of me turn, be subdivided into: (1) Examination of the medieval t sion of Plato's dialogues. Here, we are concerned with the anci Latin translation of the Timaeus forming the basis of Caleidius’ mentary, the twelfth-century translations of the Meno and Phaedo b mata in Proclus’ commentary on the Pamenides translated by Moe Deke; (2) Study of the medieval commentary on Plato. This € fof one work: the Commentary on the Timaeus of above; (3) Study of the medieval doxogeaphy of Plato. ‘This ‘of references to the doctrines of ‘Plato’ and ‘the Platonists’ in va sources; (#) Examination of later ancient writers influenced by Pl Among the most important are Cicero in works like the Aea and Tasculan Dispwations, the Apuleius of On the Doctrine of Plato a other writings, and Macrobius in the Commentary on te Dream of ‘The doctrinal approach to the phenomenon of medieval Platonis harder to categorize definitively. However, it might be vie from: (1) the perspective of a single teaching such as the sep existence of universals; (2) the perspective of a plurality of teae ‘which can, in its tum, be subdivided into: (A) a group of teachis compatible with one another as the separate existence of uni is compatible with the immortality of the human soul, (B) a of teachings revealing underlying tensions in thought Marianus Capella: De Apt = De Nips Pillpio t Marca, ed. J. Wii, Le von. Plato: Cat = Grapes in Plies Disa, ed J. Burnet, Oxford 1809-1907. Produ: In Crt In Patnis Grtum Commentara,ed.'G. Pasquali, Leipzig 19 Thierty of Chartres: Conn. im De Trin, = Commonton in Dot’ De Trine Gommontaisom Boas by Thr of artes and hs Sel, 8, N. Haein, Toro iat ‘Glsa in De Trin. = Gla in Boi de Trina bi William f conches: Gar sper Macr. = Cie mer Maceinm in The Ducting the Trinity in Galle de Canc Glass on Macrbias, by H, Rode, Diss, Co Universty 1972, ‘Glas super Plat. = Close super Plane, dB. Jeaunenu, Paris 1968, Ponca nsinute of Medi Swudies, Toronto on 8 Apa! or it grated for comme members of the audience on that occasion expecially Michael Herren, tnd Brian Stock Aristippus, and the thirteenth-century Latin translation of the lem pti) study the association of monosemy and ontological realism in ion of certain twelfth-century schools in which rhetorical elements Tas only to think of the manner in which according to Heidegger sidered i oct: nt of a plu ig from some ati @hd Derrida in particular classical ontology is c 2 cy wil ale un rae’ ain of money polveny in rea Bs oucogy (Seevon 4, What cers ere cana, however, be comiered Det meseval Paton 7 nef the conto ofthis esay wil be obvines ax well a novel. That He vous has not een prceived baer rests rom the ade of many i of soph nso hey ave onset coadeing al diet rarely ak at i oe? ai ars Lary stars who ver Tig. i8® tceval grammar and theo have been icine to broatersewpott “et i slurping how many stents of gran ignore Petre ad ‘many students of rhetoric ignore grammar.a2 owroLoGY AND POLYSEMY IN MEDIEVAL PLATONISM 83 association of being and presence in contrast to the deconstruct, age’s goal of non-ambiguity and monosemy. But when of metaphysies where being and presence are ruptured by text Por ayn Cratylus’ postion by investigating how a word/name operations. An approach to the polysemous component in Platonis revreparated into its constituent syllables each of which has a allows a reconfiguration of this problematic also. S epeaning oF referent associated with it," he also acknow!- vnawage’s capacity for ambiguity and polysemy. Moreover, in sare the contrast between two types of words or discourses, Se a patgelvid ee asctne iwa ie Peoeopty: that of Forms and that of images. For example, in de- Plato's Cratylus is an attempt to establish a viewpoint regarding d Fr the analogy with the shuttle and the demonstration about ‘correctness of names’ which avoids the drawbacks of the posi Fete obiccts, he explicitly connects the monosemy of words and that any name assigned 10 a thing is correctly imposed (advocate Be ce wih the ineligible realm of Form,” and in investigating by Hermogenes)* or else that any name assigned to a thing Games through eymological analysis, he equally explicily connects accepted by convention is correctly imposed (Socrates’ correction fhe polysemy of words and discourse with the realm of the sensory Hermogenes)? and the position that names have a natural relat Simage.” with or somehow imitate the things to which they are as Hn summary, the Grapus establishes that there is between mono- (endorsed by Cratylus)” The preferred viewpoint is a mediating one “gemy and polysemy a disjunetion—equivalent to or overlapping with ‘whereby names are chosen whenever possible to resemble things the usual Platonic dichotomies of being and becoming, truth and ‘when not so possible according to convention (outlined by Socrates falsehood, intelligible and sensible, universal and particular—which although this position itself depends on the profounder philosophi 4s radical in nature. This disjunetion forms a conceptual framework cal theory that one must achieve an understanding of names from ‘which recurs in medieval Platonism. The text of the Crablus itself things rather than of things from names, and that the things named ‘as not available during the Middle Ages. Nevertheless, its essential are in the final analysis transcendent Forms.’ teaching was ransnidted through a variety of geavnatical and philor Tit esiabMihing ke smediaiing’ viewpoint aqandiag eorecinel “tophical texts to the medieval world. Since itis clearly not possible names, Plato also claborates a contrast between two types of we 40 aticmpt a full reconstruction of this transmission here, we shall or discourses: the montosemous and the polysemous. Thus, when. De content to mention as examples of linguistic discussion in late undermines Hermogenes' position by proposing an analogy betwee Antiquity paralleling the argumentative strategy of Plato's Crabius the distinguishing power of a word/name and the separating funee Augustine's theory of verbal signification and Priscian’s techniques tion of a shuttle,’ or Cratylus’ position with a demonstration that a @F derivation and composition. word/name is only effective if assigned to a stable object,” he pres Monosemy, Polsemy, and Ontology in Plato Plato's argument for the non-ambiguity and monosemy of lan- Blase is taken up in almost identical terms by Augustine's On the Teactir. In brief, this text argues regarding signs in the specific sense * Plato: Crt. 384d. ‘The most interesting commentary on the Crabs to date i SF words the theses that (i) ‘The important issue is the relation between a P that of riod i gene ronan eee ean a Coa werba) and ‘things’ (res); (ii) Things are superior to words posto. The metation cons of divine naming which fuged toa set Be Hc rene onetice al (from the divine viewpoint) and natural to the thing (from the human view it Toe the:sake: of witch something exits ts supesior to Ur Crt 51-33) Frocks’ iacusion of the divine ction of sarmes nance tl that which exits for the sake of something else, while a thing is putaie and medieval theory tobe considered in section 4, ahough the Protea an Grek text wan absolutely unknown during the weer medieal period tid 3870-3910 r ‘Mond 305e mah Bi. 1280-135 (his. ola 1 Thi 438-0 Bid 09 e ose Seca Beret: #23, i930 (rniméma), 424b, 427b (mimesis) 431d, 4324 (ikon), 434 Ibid, 385e-387d. ~na) example of the former and a word is an example of the latter;™ roLogy AND POLYSEMY IN MEDIEVAL PLATONISM 85, riscian’s argument for our discussion might be from the meaning of words we do not learn about things; (v) maior with objects in polysemous discourse. ‘The issue of are two kinds of teacher: the divine and the human, the divine bei wore words with either intelligible or sensible objects is pre- seyet cP Monosemy and Ontology in Mediecal Platonism doctrine that there are intelligible Forms which constitute the dagon of monosemous discourse is prominent in medieval phi before c. 1200, However, its history during the period is sized less aeeat dificult to trace without the realization that it occurred Plato's description of the ambiguity and polysemy of language i Bip versions tenable cither together or separately reflected in the numerous etymological discussions of Priscian! ‘According to the first version of the theory, Forms exist as thoughts Grammatical Institutions.” However, in order to grasp the relatit God's mind. These are the indirect descendants of Plato's cos- between polysemy and etymology in this work we must perhaps di iiggical Forms and include the transcendent principles of natural tinguish (A) descriptive aspects of grammatical theory in which dh des like man and horse, and of the physical elements earth, air, polysemy of words is displayed: thus, an argument establishing fire, and water. Augustine describes these at question 46 of his On relation between a word and its etymon involves the display of iy Tiree Difirent Questions as ‘Ideas’ (idea), forms’ (formae), ‘species’ meanings, and one establishing the relation between a word and iss), and—with a caution that they should not be confused with tral posible etyma involves the display of three or more meanings Greck physical logoi—as "reasons" (atime. Ontologically speak- (B) normative aspects of grammatical theory where the polysemy the Ideas are themselves not formed by a higher principle; they words is reduced either by felating language to itsel-—for ex Thave ncither generation nor destruction; they are contained in the Where the ‘correct’ meaning of a word is established by atten divine intellect; they are truly existent; they are sellidentical; and to morphological similarities with other words—or by relating guage to reality." # For» survey of etymological discussion i ancest grammatical texts until Brin see F: Won, “Die Etymologien der lateinischen Grammatiker’ Ache Far Augustine: De Mag. 2, 34; 9, 25 ff The wo studies of Augustine's theony Bete phe vad Grammatik 8 (1892), 421-40 and 563-85; G. de Poerck, “Etymologia sigiiestion which have become clawics are R. Markus, “St. Augustine on Sig yer 8 cases Ta tradion lain’ in Anema, Gabo EA, Laman (Brags Phones 2 11957, 60-03 and B. Jackson, "The Theory of Signs in St. Augustin 1D) pp. 11 228: NL-Amuler, op, city pp. 24-1, 39-82, Although not a major rons 2 (1957), 60-03 an ec cnainaoes 18 (1BER), 9-48 flee 0 Actos Donan grammatical writings ciymdogical dcson sens to MAmmaler, Ebmology and Grammatical Dicouse i Late Aviat andthe Early M become increasingly the presecupation of Donat’ secesors and commen Ages Amsterdam 1980) pp. 76-7 cites number of relevant examples ia Pi Sm The more philesophical implications of those etymological procedures in GE op. ct, pp. 69-70 for parallel examples in his predecesor Pompei ~ is splayed or reduced einerge clearly in Pompeivs and Prsian ‘Winat ier linguistics would call the “descriptive” and ‘normative’ aspects %e questions see: M. Baratin, and F. Desbordes, Labs guise dans Pan cammatical study were not explicitly divginguished by i ancient theorist, a H cavigue I Las tars (Paris 19BL), pp. 624, M. Barain, “Grammaticalié et Sheed the unwillingness to make such a dsunction sustained the controversy Rnb che, Pisclen Maviaes poor ew hist es tris gi ing many centuries between the ‘anomalis and ‘analogi’ interpretations of grou, te Lille 1984,” pp. 155-62; M Amsler, op. ct, pp. 68°82. fuunge. On this question sce R. Robins, dnt and arinatcel They she two versions of the doctrine of ineligible Forms’ atd on the fasion of ‘Binge, Muh Partulr Referee to Mader Eingustc Decne (London 1951), pp. 13-16 0 versions ser Gers Midite Platoon ant Neplaunnn, The Lats Train, tedps en 2CLR- Robins, Shr His of Lingus (London 2nd, ed, 1979 mats Dame. IN. 1086) pp. 405-15; Idem, Fon feaicas w Brasgena (Leide 15267; Mem, Cnc in Divoure (Bertin 1996), pp. 69-73. po. 20-23,u 1p POLYSEMY IN MEDIEVAL PLATONISM 87 86 oun ane contained i things subsequent to the tanseend- ot epistemological viewpoint, these names have the 2 in of being both nonsnelgle and intligible oF, they are sources of form to the lower realities. From the episte logical viewpoint, these Tdeas are perceived by a soul that is simi to them; or by the rational part of the soul in particular.” The theory is stated by Calcidius, Macrobius, and Martianus Capella ea supreineligile and ineligible to the human combined with other metaphysical notions Fr jlar-doctrine is stated in Boethius’ On the Trinity in ee co certain suggestions of Augustine, although the trai each case, however, Calcidius? Commentary on Plot's Timaas" we read of three princi God—representing the active principle in the world—Matters {principles are now interpreted according to the Aristot- representing the passive principle in the world—, and the ‘p Regories. Ontologically speaking, these ‘substantial categories’ digo’ (ecemplun) to which God looks in producing physical thi ae ediciones seundim ren) enjoy the ambivalent status In Macrobius’ Commentary on the Dream of Scipio” it is rather a qu Eyeing both unified and distinct in relation to one another—such tion of three levels of monad: first, there is God; secondly, there Fee all substantial although substance is included among. his Intellect or Mind which is generated from him—this produc principles and also of being both predicated of and not pred- from itself innumerable ‘species of genera’ (generam specie), and fof things subsequent to the transcendent, From the epi contains the latter within itself undividedly—; and thirdly, there gical viewpoint, the substantial categories have the ambivalent Soul. In Martianus Capella's Marriage of Philology and Mercun® fof being both conceivable and not conceivable in terms of ‘again read of three principles: the monad—corresponding to Ju in the divine sphere—, the dyad—corresponding to Juno in divine sphere—, and the triad associated with the ‘ideal Forms’ (i formas nature into four species: that which is not created but creates, ‘According to the sccond version of the theory, Forms exist Which is created and creates, that which is created but does not attributes of God, Some of these are indirect descendants of th and that which is not created and does not create. The see- attributes of the Forms in general according to Plato: for examp Species comprises the totality of ‘prinwadal causes! (cause pri- the Being, Life, and Intelleet which are the transcendent pringp fal) which are equivalent both to thoughts in God's mind and of existing, living, and intellective things; others are indirect descem the attributes of God." Eriugena depends equally on the ps.- ants of Plato’s moral and aesthetic Forms: for example, the Goo ian and on the Augustino-Bocthian presentation of the divine- and Beauty which are the transcendent principles of good and be tribute component. The two versions of the theory of Forms recur tiful things. Ps.-Dionysius calls these the ‘names’ (nomina) or ‘pr Closely united in Anselm of Canterbury. His Monolagion attempts sions’ (processions) of God in his On Dizine Names as translated B demonstrate rationally that a supreme principle exists as both Eriugena, Ontologically speaking, the names enjoy the ambivaef ial and efficient cause of the visible world. In establishing the status of being both unified and distinet in relation to one another Mer, he refers to the thought in God’s mind as an ‘exemplar’ all these principles are eternal and existent although Eternity plum), form of things’ (forma rerun), or ‘primal essence” (prin Existence are included among the principles~and also of being b i eta) an in estabshing the later, tothe aeribute of God he “throughs” (rap. the supreme 2 (sammun scl is dependent primarily on the Augustino-Boethian pr © Austin: De Di. Opa LXXXIM, gu. 46 tion of the divine-attribute component. Ako during the medieval 2 Gali fe Tm. 307, 30511-3082 8 Macrobius: fs Sin Sng. L. 6, 8-9 s * Martanun Capella: De Nap Vit 731-3 fn actual fact, the presentation of theory of Forme in Caled, Macrobis, and Marvanas Capella which fl dtovographie) ify fom the preseaton ia Augustine (hich combine Stl Plots) For deals se Geah, ide Platine and Nope 1, pp 24 wets During the medieval period, these two versions of the theory of are fused into one by Eriugena. His Peripysen divides uni- Be Bena Vio sperm Dim, De Di, Nom, 1192 Df Boethis: De Thiet Sugen: Pp UL 6150 elm of Canterbury: Mona. 1-4, 9-10, 3388 period, the two versions of the theory of Forms are fused into, by William of Conches. His Commentary on Plato's Tamacus"” by ng three of the Aristotelian four causes to the first principle who jg cfficient cause of all things as Being, formal cause of all things Wisdom, and final cause of all thi joodness introduces, attributes of God, and by further describing the second Aristoteli cause as Mind containing the ‘archetypal world” (archetipus m introduces the thoughts in God’s mind. William is dependent marily on the Augustino-Boethian presentation of the divine-attrib component. In studying the late antique and medieval versions of the cal theory of Forms, one clearly sees that their primary function ag the ontological foundation of monosemous discourse is beginning be compromised. Thus, to speak of man as (a) a thought in Go mind and (#) a spatio-temporal entity, or else to speak of life as (a) attribute of God and (6) as something spatio-temporal, is tantamo! to using these terms in both figurative and non-figurative senses thereby admitting a certain polysemy into them. The problem is ognized to varying degrees by Augustine and his successors. Polysemy and Ontology in Medieval Pratonism The doctrine that there is a polysemous discourse whose founda is constituted by verbal images is also prominent losophy before c. 1200. Its history during this period is difficult t trace because the relation between polysemy and the image is ofte assumed rather than stated; and becaus in a multitude of forms not easily reducible to simple categories: O course, the vagueness and instability of presentation in medieval is not inconsistent with the character of polysemy itself, What fol lows is an attempt to classify this phenomenon along broad lines: Boethius’ On Division provides a general articulation of polyse Here, polysemy is termed ‘division of the utterance’ (dvisio vis) articulated into a number of classes and sub-classes: division (1) “nt several meanings’ (in signiicationes plues, subdivided into (A) ‘equiv cation’ (aequivocatio) where a single word (a noun) has several me © Wiliam of Conehes: Glue sper lt. 32, 98-9, ‘pxtoLoGy AND POLYSEMY IN MEDIEVAL, PLATONISM 89 (B) ‘ambiguity’ (amphibotia) where a combination of | Bor eee ani verbys)) has several meanings or referents. but ron here this combination has only two meanings oF precise fener e) has & meaning oF referent which varies according ate of words with other meanings or referents; (3) ‘accord- ef oneanings usually parallels a platy of referents; for plu alist view of language implied in his views that the fo

You might also like

• Dokumen - Pub The Oxford Handbook of Roman Philosophy Oxford Handbooks Series 0199328382 9780199328383

  

  No ratings yet

  Dokumen - Pub The Oxford Handbook of Roman Philosophy Oxford Handbooks Series 0199328382 9780199328383

  649 pages
• The Reception of Plato's Phaedrus From Antiquity

  

  No ratings yet

  The Reception of Plato's Phaedrus From Antiquity

  292 pages
• The Platonic Sources of Berthold of Moos

  

  No ratings yet

  The Platonic Sources of Berthold of Moos

  256 pages
• Alexander of Aphrodisias, On Fate (Griego-Inglés)

  

  100% (1)

  Alexander of Aphrodisias, On Fate (Griego-Inglés)

  161 pages
• Neoplatonism and Early Christian Thought

  

  100% (1)

  Neoplatonism and Early Christian Thought

  251 pages
• Allen R.E. & Furley D.J. - Studies in Presocratic Philosophy

  

  100% (1)

  Allen R.E. & Furley D.J. - Studies in Presocratic Philosophy

  208 pages
• M. R. Wright - Introducing Greek Philosophy-Acumen (2009)

  

  No ratings yet

  M. R. Wright - Introducing Greek Philosophy-Acumen (2009)

  253 pages
• PhA 086 - Baltussen - Theophrastus Against The Presocratics and Plato - Peripatetic Dialectic in The de Sensibus 2000 PDF

  

  100% (1)

  PhA 086 - Baltussen - Theophrastus Against The Presocratics and Plato - Peripatetic Dialectic in The de Sensibus 2000 PDF

  303 pages
• VERDENIUS, W. J. Parmenides' Conception of Light (1949)

  

  100% (1)

  VERDENIUS, W. J. Parmenides' Conception of Light (1949)

  17 pages
• (Studies in Platonism, Neoplatonism, and The Platonic Tradition 4) Kevin Corrigan, John D. Turner - Platonisms - Ancient, Modern, and Postmodern-BRILL (2007) PDF

  

  100% (2)

  (Studies in Platonism, Neoplatonism, and The Platonic Tradition 4) Kevin Corrigan, John D. Turner - Platonisms - Ancient, Modern, and Postmodern-BRILL (2007) PDF

  293 pages
• (Princeton Paperbacks) Amélie Rorty - Essays On Aristotle's Poetics-Princeton University Press (1992)

  

  No ratings yet

  (Princeton Paperbacks) Amélie Rorty - Essays On Aristotle's Poetics-Princeton University Press (1992)

  447 pages
• Steven Gersh-Middle Platonism and Neoplatonism. The Latin Tradition. 1 (1986)

  

  100% (1)

  Steven Gersh-Middle Platonism and Neoplatonism. The Latin Tradition. 1 (1986)

  213 pages
• Moran, Platonism Medieval

  

  No ratings yet

  Moran, Platonism Medieval

  10 pages
• PhA 113 - Eliasson - The Notion of That Which Depends On Us in Plotinus and Its Background PDF

  

  No ratings yet

  PhA 113 - Eliasson - The Notion of That Which Depends On Us in Plotinus and Its Background PDF

  265 pages
• Discovering The Mysteries of Ancient America

  

  No ratings yet

  Discovering The Mysteries of Ancient America

  293 pages
• Diels-Doxographi Graeci PDF

  

  No ratings yet

  Diels-Doxographi Graeci PDF

  883 pages
• (Aarhus Studies in Mediterranean Antiquity) Asger Ousager-Plotinus - On Selfhood, Freedom and Politics - Aarhus University Press (2004)

  

  100% (1)

  (Aarhus Studies in Mediterranean Antiquity) Asger Ousager-Plotinus - On Selfhood, Freedom and Politics - Aarhus University Press (2004)

  397 pages
• The Symposium of Plato (1991) - R. E. Allen's Translation.

  

  100% (1)

  The Symposium of Plato (1991) - R. E. Allen's Translation.

  188 pages
• Inquiry, Forms, and Substances

  

  100% (1)

  Inquiry, Forms, and Substances

  237 pages
• Plato's Parmenides - Plato

  

  No ratings yet

  Plato's Parmenides - Plato

  207 pages
• Re-Evaluating E. R. Dodds Platonism PDF

  

  No ratings yet

  Re-Evaluating E. R. Dodds Platonism PDF

  44 pages
• Plato's Seventh Letter A.E. Taylor

  

  No ratings yet

  Plato's Seventh Letter A.E. Taylor

  24 pages
• Seth Benardete - Socrates Second Sailing, On Plato's Republic

  

  No ratings yet

  Seth Benardete - Socrates Second Sailing, On Plato's Republic

  248 pages
• M. Schofield - Diakosmesis

  

  No ratings yet

  M. Schofield - Diakosmesis

  46 pages
• Logos-And-Trinity-Patterns-Of-Platonist-Influence-On-Early-Christianity, J. Dillon (Makale)

  

  100% (1)

  Logos-And-Trinity-Patterns-Of-Platonist-Influence-On-Early-Christianity, J. Dillon (Makale)

  13 pages
• Duffy, Michaelis Psellus Philosophica Minora I

  

  100% (1)

  Duffy, Michaelis Psellus Philosophica Minora I

  183 pages
• Plato's Phaedrus R. Hackforth Plato's Phaedrus. Translated With Introduction and Commentary. Tate, J

  

  No ratings yet

  Plato's Phaedrus R. Hackforth Plato's Phaedrus. Translated With Introduction and Commentary. Tate, J

  3 pages
• Sherk Roman Documents 20-21-43

  

  No ratings yet

  Sherk Roman Documents 20-21-43

  13 pages
• Timaeus Locrus

  

  No ratings yet

  Timaeus Locrus

  18 pages
• (Ralph Cudworth) Ralph Cudworth A Treatise Concer (BookFi)

  

  No ratings yet

  (Ralph Cudworth) Ralph Cudworth A Treatise Concer (BookFi)

  260 pages
• Cornford UnwrittenPhilosophy

  

  No ratings yet

  Cornford UnwrittenPhilosophy

  46 pages
• Nature and Teaching by Plato

  

  No ratings yet

  Nature and Teaching by Plato

  10 pages
• Dodds ParmenidesPlatoOrigin 1928

  

  No ratings yet

  Dodds ParmenidesPlatoOrigin 1928

  15 pages
• Naddaf, What Is Presocratic Philosophy? (2006)

  

  No ratings yet

  Naddaf, What Is Presocratic Philosophy? (2006)

  19 pages
• Westin Aristotle's Rhetorical Energeia

  

  No ratings yet

  Westin Aristotle's Rhetorical Energeia

  11 pages
• Zhmud L Wissenschaft Philosophie Und Rel

  

  100% (1)

  Zhmud L Wissenschaft Philosophie Und Rel

  4 pages
• 2008 Alessandra Fussi The Desire

  

  100% (1)

  2008 Alessandra Fussi The Desire

  27 pages
• STOKES, Michael C. One and Many in Presocratic Philosophy

  

  No ratings yet

  STOKES, Michael C. One and Many in Presocratic Philosophy

  364 pages
• Armstrong1974 Infinite Regress Argument and The Problem of Universals

  

  100% (1)

  Armstrong1974 Infinite Regress Argument and The Problem of Universals

  13 pages
• Hunter (2002) Acting Down. The Ideology of Hellenistic Performance

  

  No ratings yet

  Hunter (2002) Acting Down. The Ideology of Hellenistic Performance

  18 pages
• Symposium BURY PDF

  

  No ratings yet

  Symposium BURY PDF

  262 pages
• Aristocles On Timon

  

  100% (1)

  Aristocles On Timon

  20 pages
• Numenius and Alcinous On The First Principle John Whittaker

  

  No ratings yet

  Numenius and Alcinous On The First Principle John Whittaker

  11 pages
• From Stoicism To Platonism (The Development of Philosophy, 100 BCE-100 CE) Are We Nearly There Yet Eudorus On Aristotle's Categories

  

  No ratings yet

  From Stoicism To Platonism (The Development of Philosophy, 100 BCE-100 CE) Are We Nearly There Yet Eudorus On Aristotle's Categories

  13 pages
• (Parmenides, Leonardo Taran) Parmenides A Text Wi

  

  No ratings yet

  (Parmenides, Leonardo Taran) Parmenides A Text Wi

  157 pages
• Nigidius Figulus Swoboda

  

  No ratings yet

  Nigidius Figulus Swoboda

  155 pages
• Burnyeat de Anima II 5 PDF

  

  No ratings yet

  Burnyeat de Anima II 5 PDF

  63 pages
• Studies of Platos Philebus A Bibliograph

  

  No ratings yet

  Studies of Platos Philebus A Bibliograph

  10 pages
• Aristotle in Byzantium: Klaus Oehler

  

  No ratings yet

  Aristotle in Byzantium: Klaus Oehler

  14 pages
• Plato S Influence On Gerogios Gemistos P

  

  No ratings yet

  Plato S Influence On Gerogios Gemistos P

  20 pages
• Waterfield (1980) The Place of The Philebus in Plato's Dialogues en Phronesis 25

  

  No ratings yet

  Waterfield (1980) The Place of The Philebus in Plato's Dialogues en Phronesis 25

  36 pages
• Memoirs 17-08 West

  

  No ratings yet

  Memoirs 17-08 West

  32 pages
• Plato Und Popper

  

  No ratings yet

  Plato Und Popper

  11 pages
• Eriugena Editions 2012

  

  No ratings yet

  Eriugena Editions 2012

  13 pages
• Glucker J., Plato in The Academy. Some Cautious Reflections

  

  No ratings yet

  Glucker J., Plato in The Academy. Some Cautious Reflections

  22 pages
• Golitsis-Simplicius and Philoponus On The Authority Opf Aristotle

  

  No ratings yet

  Golitsis-Simplicius and Philoponus On The Authority Opf Aristotle

  2 pages
• Neoplatonic Exegeses of Plato's Cosmogony (Timaeus 27C-28C)

  

  No ratings yet

  Neoplatonic Exegeses of Plato's Cosmogony (Timaeus 27C-28C)

  26 pages
• Gagarin - Dike in Archaic Greek Thought

  

  No ratings yet

  Gagarin - Dike in Archaic Greek Thought

  13 pages
• Usher, Satyr Play in Plato's Symposium

  

  No ratings yet

  Usher, Satyr Play in Plato's Symposium

  25 pages