The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity Volume II PDF
Preview The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity Volume II
THE CAMBRIDGE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY IN LATE ANTIQUITY TheCambridgeHistoryofPhilosophyinLateAntiquitycomprisesoverfortyspecially commissioned essays by experts on the philosophy of the period 200–800 ce. DesignedasasuccessortoTheCambridgeHistoryofLaterGreekandEarlyMedieval Philosophy(ed.A.H.Armstrong),ittakesintoaccountsomefortyyearsofschol- arshipsincethepublicationofthatvolume.Thecontributorsexaminephilosophy as it entered literature, science and religion, and offer new and extensive assess- mentsofphilosopherswhountilrecentlyhavebeenmostlyignored.Thevolume also includes a complete digest of all philosophical works known to have been writtenduringthisperiod.Itwillbeaninvaluableresourceforallthoseinterested inthisrichandstillemergingfield. lloyd p. gerson is Professor of Philosophy at the University of Toronto. He is theauthorofnumerousbooksincludingAncientEpistemology(Cambridge,2009), Aristotle and Other Platonists (2005) and Knowing Persons: A Study in Plato (2004), aswellastheeditorofTheCambridgeCompaniontoPlotinus(1996). The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity Volume II edited by LLOYD P. GERSON cambridgeuniversitypress Cambridge,NewYork,Melbourne,Madrid,CapeTown,Singapore, Sa˜oPaulo,Delhi,Dubai,Tokyo,MexicoCity CambridgeUniversityPress TheEdinburghBuilding,Cambridgecb28ru,UK PublishedintheUnitedStatesofAmericabyCambridgeUniversityPress,NewYork www.cambridge.org Informationonthistitle:www.cambridge.org/9780521876421 (cid:2)C CambridgeUniversityPress2010 Thispublicationisincopyright.Subjecttostatutoryexception andtotheprovisionsofrelevantcollectivelicensingagreements, noreproductionofanypartmaytakeplacewithoutthewritten permissionofCambridgeUniversityPress. Firstpublished2010 PrintedintheUnitedKingdomattheUniversityPress,Cambridge AcataloguerecordforthispublicationisavailablefromtheBritishLibrary VolumeIIisbn978-0-521-19484-6Hardback Availableonlyasasetisbn978-0-521-876421 CambridgeUniversityPresshasnoresponsibilityforthepersistenceor accuracyofURLsforexternalorthird-partyinternetwebsitesreferredto inthispublicationanddoesnotguaranteethatanycontentonsuch websitesis,orwillremain,accurateorappropriate. CONTENTS VOLUME II VI Late Platonism IntroductiontoPartVI page583 32FromConstantinetoJustinian 585 elizabeth depalma digeser 33PlutarchofAthens 608 angela longo 34Syrianus 616 angela longo 35Proclus 630 carlos steel 36AmmoniusHermeiouandhisschool 654 david blank 37Damascius 667 gerd van riel 38Olympiodorus 697 jan opsomer 39SimpliciusofCilicia 711 han baltussen 40JohnPhiloponus 733 koenraad verrycken 41PriscianofLydiaandPseudo-Simpliciusonthesoul 756 f. a. j. de haas v vi Contents VII The third encounter of Christianity with ancient Greek philosophy IntroductiontoPartVII 765 42Pseudo-DionysiustheAreopagite 767 eric perl 43Boethius 788 john magee 44MaximustheConfessor 813 david bradshaw 45JohnScotusEriugena 829 wayne hankey and lloyd p. gerson VIII Philosophy in transition IntroductiontoPartVIII 841 46EarlyByzantinephilosophy 843 katerina ierodiakonou and george zografidis 47TheoriginsofIslamicphilosophy 869 cristina d’ancona 48Ancientphilosophybecomesmedievalphilosophy 894 stephen gersh Appendix:Listofworksofancientauthors 915 Listofabbreviations 966 Bibliography 983 Indexlocorum 1183 Generalindex 1249 PART VI LATE PLATONISM INTRODUCTION TO PART VI Inthissection,weturntothelastphaseofpaganancientphilosophy.Thedate 529 ce when the Emperor Justinian officially closed the Academy in Athens is conventionally taken to be the terminus of non-Christian philosophy. Of course,thisissomethingofanoverstatement.ThephilosophersOlympiodorus, Damascius and Simplicius all lived up to a generation beyond this date. They wereapparently,however,notallowedtoteachinpublic.Wehavenorecordof anyopenlynon-Christianphilosopherintheancientworldafterthelastquarter ofthesixthcenturyce.Nevertheless,ancientGreekphilosophyitselfdidliveon withintheChurchandintheseventhcentury,withintheearlyschoolsofIslamic philosophy. The history of ancient philosophy as intellectual infrastructure for religionasopposedtoautonomousenterprisewillbecanvassedinthelasttwo sections. Here we are concerned with those philosophers, mainly in Athens and Alexandria, who sought to articulate and defend the Platonic inheritance. Scholars in the early part of the twentieth century sometimes maintained that theAlexandrianandAthenian‘branches’ofPlatonismdifferedintheirfocuson eitherreligionormetaphysics.Thisviewisgenerallyregardedtodayasmistaken or greatly oversimplified. Modern research has led to the view that the inter- changesbetweenAthensandAlexandriawerefrequentandfruitfulduringthis period.ThesupposedemphasisonreligionamongtheAlexandrianPlatonistsis probablytobeaccountedforbythestrongChristianpoliticaldomination.The contemporarypressingissuesfacedbyphilosopherstherewereprincipallythose raisedbyChristianopponents.Bycontrast,inAthens,theAcademy,beginning withPlutarchandendingwithDamascius,seemedtobefocusedonthemoreor lesstraditionalphilosophicalissuesthatwecantracebacktotheOldAcademy itself. Such work in metaphysics, for example, did not exclude Proclus’ efforts tosystematizeatheologicalversionofPlatonism. 583 584 IntroductiontoPartVI Inthisperiod,wealsoseethegreatfloweringofcommentariesbyPlatonists both on the dialogues of Plato and on the works of Aristotle. Unfortunately, most of the former are lost. There still exists, fortunately, a mass of detailed philosophicalcommentariesonthosecentralworksofAristotlethatweresuit- able as preparation for the study of Plato. Since it was universally believed that Aristotle’s philosophy was in harmony with Platonism despite his occasional lapses, it was held that the study of Aristotle was the correct preparation for appreciating the Platonic higher ‘mysteries’. Not only do these commentaries representaseriousphilosophicaldialoguebetweenPlatonistsandPlato’sgreatest disciple, but they contain an invaluable record of debate among the Platonists regardingthecorrectunderstandingofPlato. JohnPhiloponusisinawaythekeytransitionalfigureinourperiod.Whether he was once a pagan who converted to Christianity or always a Christian of some sort, itis clear especially inhis philosophical and scientific as opposed to strictly theological works that Platonism as it had been understood for more than 800 years provided the armature for all his intellectual work. His later disputes with orthodox Platonism concerning the eternity of the world on behalf of Christian creationism represents one enormously influential episode in the gradual self-understanding of Christianity among its theologians. It is also no doubt in part owing to Philoponus’ Platonism and his suspicion that an authentic Peripatetic philosophy was actually inimical to Christianity that the assumption of the harmony between these two central figures would be abandoned. 32 FROM CONSTANTINE TO JUSTINIAN elizabeth depalma digeser 1 THE HEIRS OF THEODOSIUS I: CONSTANTINOPLE VERSUS RAVENNA In the fall of 394, as his entourage – victorious after fighting along Istria’s FrigidusRiver–movedsteadilytowardMilan,thesouthwesternimperialcap- ital, Theodosius I (378–95) could have been excused for thinking that heaven had amply rewarded his piety. His sons had outlived the heirs of Valentinian I (364–75), so his family alone held claim to the throne. He had successfully put down not one but two usurpers, Magnus Maximus in the 380s and most recentlyEugeniusattheFrigidusRiver.Andtheemperor’srecentedictsnour- ishingthenowofficiallyorthodoxNiceneformofChristianityaimedtostifle, if not extinguish, all other forms of religious expression save Judaism, which was still tolerated, despite events in Callinicum (CTh. 16.1.2; 16.10.10–12). Certainly, Augustine saw the entire history of the Christian message as culmi- nating triumphantly in this period (Comm. in Psal. 6.10–12). Nevertheless, in thetimehetooktotravelbetweenthebattlegroundandthecapitalcity,Theo- dosius,nowinhislateforties,becamegravelyill.HesentforhissonHonorius, residing in Constantinople with his older brother, Arcadius, ruling as eastern Augustus in his late teens under the watchful eye of his praetorian prefect. The nine-year-old arrived, and Theodosius appointed as his guardian Stilicho, his magister utriusque militiae (Zos. 4.59). By 17 January 395 the emperor was dead. Withthereignsofhistwoyoungsons,Honorius(395–423)intheWestand Arcadius (395–408) in the East, Theodosius reaped a harvest much different fromwhathehadintendedtosow.Forexample,thegoalofhissettlementwith the Visigoths, a pact born of necessity after Valens’ stunning defeat at Adri- anople,wasamutuallybeneficialrelationshipbetweentheRomanstateandthe Germans now living within its frontiers, fighting for Rome as foederati under their own commanders. That Theodosius considered Germans to be worthy soldiers and potentially good citizens is amply demonstrated by his treatment 585 586 ElizabethDePalmaDigeser of the Visigoths and his trust in Stilicho, the half-Vandal general whom he had married to his niece even before his designation as Honorius’ guardian (Zos.4.57–9).Unfortunately,afterTheodosius’death,Germaniccommanders, no longer held in check by Theodosius’ auctoritas and patronage, could exact demandsfromeasternandwesterncourtssimplybyrallyingtheirfollowerswho, living and serving only with their own people, had still only a thin concep- tion of Roman culture and institutions. Indeed, the Visigoths, perhaps under pressure from the Huns, started raiding Greece under the leadership of Alaric aroundthetimeoftheemperor’sdeath(Claud.InRufn.2.186–96).Moreover, whileitdiminishedthethreatofusurpationfromgeneralsrallyingaroundafig- ureheadprince,Theodosius’determinationtokeepthethronewithinhisown family yielded an empire prematurely divided between two children. His own experience with Gratian and Valentinian II had surely illustrated the weakness of regency governments and the ease with which young emperors could be isolated both from the troops who ensured their safety and from their impe- rial colleagues. Accordingly, Theodosius might have done better to have built upon Diocletian’s model, grooming two senior men to follow him as east- ern and western Augusti, and then naming his young sons as their Caesars. Together, then, the unintended consequences of these two policies became a slow-moving,perfectstormthatunderminedthewesternEmpireandalienated EastandWest. AcrossthenextthreecenturiesthisrollingseachangesawtheWestfallaway fromtheempireintheEast,andalthoughRomaninfrastructure,institutionsand culturecontinuedtobethesubstrateofsociety,politicallytheruleofGermanic kingsreplacedthatofRomanemperors.TheEastwithstoodthereverberations ofthefalloftheWestratherwell,somuchso,infactthatavigorousintellectual lifecontinuedinthephilosophicalschoolsofAthensandAlexandria,athought cultureinwhichsomewesternerscontinuedtoengageandthatprovidedsome oftheparticipantsinandthebackgroundagainstwhichseveralheatedtheolog- icaldebatesplayedout.Indeed,bythesixthcenturytheEastwassoaffluentand confidentthat, undertheemperorJustinian,itattemptedbothareconquestof the West politically and of certain dissident eastern provinces theologically – a struggle that ironically helped lay the groundwork for the conquest of Italy by theLombardsandoftheNearEastandnorthAfricabytheMuslims.Withthese two conquests ensued political and cultural changes that would transform the MediterraneanSeafromaconnectingarterytoarepellentbarrier,asthreediffer- entculturalzonestookshape:aRomanCatholicnorth-west,aGreekOrthodox north-east,andanIslamicsouth,geographiccontoursthatcanstillbediscerned today.
Description:The list of books you might like
