Table Of ContentN E O
P L A T O N IS M
R. T. Wallis
C H A R L E S S C R I B N E R ’S SO NS
N EW Y O R K
All rights reserved. No part of this book
may be reproduced in any form without the
permission of Charles Scribner’s Sons.
A-1.72 (I)
Printed in Great Britain
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 70-39183
SBN 684—12,903-5
Contents
FOREWORD ix
Map oft he eastern Mediterranean in the early centuries a.d. xii
1. T he A ims of Neoplatonism i
2. T he Sources of Neoplatonism 16
3. Plotinus
i. Life and writings 47
11. The three Hypostases 57
h i. Emanation, Logos, Sympathy 61
iv. The individual soul 72
v. Return to the One 82
vi. Plotinus and later Neoplatonism 90
4. Porphyry and Iamblichus
i. Neoplatonism from Plotinus to the
death of Julian 94
11. Anti-Christian polemic and the
problem of theurgy 100
III. The three Hypostases in Porphyry
and the Parmenides commentator 110
IV. Iamblichus’ counter-attack; the soul
and her salvation 118
v. The structure of late Neoplatonic
metaphysics 123
vi. Textual exegesis according to
Porphyry and Iamblichus 134
5. T he A thenian School
i. Neoplatonism at Athens and Alexandria 138
11. Some basic doctrines of the
Athenian School 146
in. Damascius and the end of the Academy 158
vi Contents
6. T he Influence ofN eoplatonism 160
ABBREVIATIONS ' 179
CITATIONS OF ANCIENT SOURCES 183
BIBLIOGRAPHY 185
INDEX 197
To GLYN DAVIES
Foreword
Few of the movements that have shaped Western culture and thought
have remained as little known as Neoplatonism. Some reasons for this
neglect, and for my belief that it is unjustified, will be found in the final
chapter of this book. But two of the basic reasons are simply the diffi
culty of the Neoplatonic writings and the absence of a satisfactory
popular account, the last general study by a single hand being Whit
taker’s Neoplatonists (second edition 1918), which has been largely
outdated by recent research. (The more recent Cambridge History of
Later Greek and Early Medieval Philosophy, a product of several
authors, is in many sections too difficult and compressed for the general
reader). In such a situation, misconceptions and half-truths remain
widespread, on the part of both admirers and critics of the school. To
refute these would take a book in itself and, though some of them are
dealt with at appropriate points, I have for the most part simply
ignored them and concentrated on producing as accurate a picture of
the movement as I could.
The defects of my own account others are more likely to notice than
myself. One which I particularly regret is the absence of extended
quotations from the Neoplatonists’ works. But their inclusion would
have converted the already difficult problem of summarising Neopla
tonic doctrine in a book of reasonably short compass into a quite
impossible one. It is hoped that this omission may in future years be
remedied by an anthology of relevant texts. It should also be possible
in future editions of the present work to include more extended
discussions of topics, like the thought of Damascius, whose importance
is unquestionable, but whose detailed treatment is hindered by insuffi
cient progress of scholarly research.
My aim has been above all to afford readers some fundamental
principles to assist them in penetrating the labyrinth of the Neopla
tonists’ works. Reference may be made in this connection to the first
chapter’s discussion of the school’s three main aims and to the list on
pp. 90-3 of the problems bequeathed by Plotinus to his successors. Here
I have tried to show how most of the movement’s later philosophical
developments follow naturally from points made in the Enneads.
Inevitably such a procedure runs the risk of over-simplification; that
Neoplatonism is not as simple as I have made it appear a perusal of any
of its metaphysical writings will show. In the present case, however,
over-simplification seemed clearly the lesser of two opposing evils.
Similarly the need for brevity has prevented my doing justice to the
Neoplatonists’ arguments, which generally go far beyond the brief
hints I have been able to present. Here again recourse to their actual
works is the only remedy. If as a result I have sometimes made them
appear superficial—certainly the last defect with which those who
know their writings would charge them—I can only claim their
posthumous indulgence.
Even so, an account of Neoplatonism is necessarily more difficult
than some other books in the present series. A special problem is posed
by the school’s liberal use of technical terms, generally derived from
Classical philosophy, whose English equivalents, such as ‘matter’ or
‘intelligence’, tend to be misleading. Here again only the briefest of
explanations have been possible. Study of Neoplatonism presupposes
some acquaintance with earlier Greek thought and, if time were spent
explaining matters whose proper place is a book on Plato or Aristotle,
we should never reach the Neoplatonists at all.
Finally, there is the question of my debt to earlier scholars. If I have
not always been able to warn the reader where my views differ from
those generally accepted, neither have I been able to acknowledge the far
more numerous occasions where my account is little more than a
summary of my predecessors’ work. None the less it seems worthwhile
to present a summary of material for the most part available only in
specialist studies in French or German, even though the progress of
research will rapidly render much of it, especially its post-Plotinian
sections, out of date. That the book is not even worse is due to
Professors A. H. Armstrong, A. C. Lloyd and J. M. Dillon, Mr. David
Esterly, Mr. Andrew Smith and Dr. Yahia Raef, who have read and
commented on it, or parts of it, in typescript. I am particularly grateful
to Professor Dillon for allowing me to use his unpublished work on
Iamblichus. Needless to say none of the above scholars should be taken
as endorsing all my views, and for such imperfections as remain I alone
am responsible.
Thanks are also due to my typists and to the Faculty Research
Council of the University of Oklahoma for undertaking and paying for
the typing of the final version of this book; and to the Clarendon Press
for permission to reproduce the diagram on p. 152, adapted from E. R.
Dodds’ edition of Proclus’ Elements.
