The Heirs of Plato: A Study of the Old Academy (347-274 BC)

263 Pages·2003·1.58 MB·English

by  John Dillon

The Heirs of Plato
This page intentionally left blank
The Heirs of
Plato
A Study of the Old Academy
(347–274 )
BC
John Dillon
CLARENDON PRESS · OXFORD
3
Great Clarendon Street,Oxford OX2 6DP
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research,scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide in
Oxford New York
Auckland Cape Town Dar es Salaam Hong Kong Karachi
Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Nairobi
New Delhi Shanghai Taipei Toronto
With offices in
Argentina Austria Brazil Chile Czech Republic France Greece
Guatemala Hungary Italy Japan Poland Portugal Singapore
South Korea Switzerland Thailand Turkey Ukrraine Vietnam
Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press
in the UK and in certain other countries
Published in the United States
by Oxford University Press Inc.,New York
© John Dillon,2003
The moral rights of the author have been asserted
Database right Oxford University Press (maker)
First published 2003
First published in paperback 2005
All rights reserved.No part of this publication may be reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system,or transmitted,in any form or by any means,
without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press,
or as expressly permitted by law,or under terms agreed with the appropriate
reprographics rights organization.Enquiries concerning reproduction
outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department,
Oxford University Press,at the address above
You must not circulate this book in any other binding or cover
and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Data available
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
Dillon,John M.
The heirs of Plato :a study of the Old Academy (347–274 B.C.)/
by John Dillon.
p.cm.
Includes bibliographical references (p.) and index.
1. Platonists—History. 2. Philosophy,Ancient. I. Title
B517.D536 2003 184—dc21 2002035577
Typeset in Calisto MT by
Cambrian Typesetters,Frimley,Surrey
Printed in Great Britain
on acid-free paper by
Biddles Ltd,
King’s Lynn,Norfolk
ISBN 0–19–823766–9 978–0–19–823766–2
ISBN 0–19–927946–2 (pbk.) 978–0–19–927946–3 (pbk.)
1 3 5 7 9 10 8 6 4 2
Preface
When Plato died,full of years,in 347 BC,he left behind him,not only a body
of philosophical writings the like of which had never been seen before (or
indeed,in respect oftheir peculiar quality,since),but also a remarkable orga-
nization,the ‘Academy’(though just how much ofan organized institution it
was is something that will have to be discussed in our first chapter), and a
devoted, though independent-minded, body of disciples. This book is an
attempt to recreate something of the atmosphere of the seventy years or so
following on the Master’s death,and the intellectual paths taken by his chief
disciples.It is a period which,though formative in the history of Platonism,
has suffered from a remarkable degree of neglect down the centuries.
This,though regrettable,is not entirely surprising.Many a prudent schol-
ar would say,with much justification,that,desirable as it would be to unrav-
el the obscurities of what has been known conventionally,since at least the
later Hellenistic era,as the Old Academy,the evidence is just not there.The
more controversial claim would also be made in many quarters that,even ifit
were,these figures,Speusippus,Xenocrates,Polemo,and their associates,are
not of a distinction that merits much attention.The real philosophical action
in this period was taking place across town, in the Lyceum of Aristotle,
Theophrastus,and their associates.
Both these claims I am concerned to controvert.It will be the thesis of this
book that,between them,Speusippus and Xenocrates set the agenda for what
was to become,over the succeeding centuries,the intellectual tradition which
we call Platonism (Xenocrates initiating the mainstream of ‘Middle
Platonism’,Speusippus,with some of his more daring speculations,stimu-
lating certain developments in ‘Neopythagoreanism’,which proved fruitful
for the ‘Neoplatonism’ofPlotinus and his successors1),while even that prac-
tical man Polemo would seem to have anticipated the Stoics in a number of
their chief doctrines. Other, more minor figures, such as Heraclides of
Pontus, Philippus of Opus, and Crantor, made significant contributions as
well to the rich tapestry of later Greek thought.
1 The quotation marks employed here,which will not be repeated,serve to indicate that none
ofthese terms were such as would have been adopted by the thinkers concerned,who would have
seen themselves simply as either PlatonikoiorPythagoreioi.
Preface
The plan ofthis book is designed to combine continuity ofdoctrinal expo-
sition with a biographical approach.There is certainly a complex of themes
characteristic of the Old Academy as a whole,but it is also undeniable that
the three chief successors of Plato had each very distinctive approaches to
many of those themes,and this creative diversity would be obscured by an
exclusively thematic treatment.I propose,then,to begin with a chapter dis-
cussing the structure of the Academy,as regards both its physical establish-
ment and its methods of operation, a conspectus of the personalities
involved,and a survey of the chief themes characteristic of the Platonism of
the period. This will be followed by three chapters, devoted respectively to
each of the three heads,Speusippus,Xenocrates,and Polemo,focusing on
both the continuities and the distinctive features exhibited in their doctrinal
positions;and that in turn will be followed by a chapter devoted to the minor
figures connected with the Academy. The book will conclude with a short
epilogue,examining the relations of the Academy with both Peripatos and
Stoa,and the reasons for the move to scepticism associated with Arcesilaus.
What I hope will be revealed is a series of innovations in,and consolida-
tions of,Plato’s teaching which,taken together,form the foundation of all
later Platonism, and to some extent of Stoicism as well. What will also
become apparent is how much of Aristotelianism becomes absorbed (or
absorbed back?) into the bloodstream of Platonism during this period,leav-
ing the successors ofAristotle,to all appearances,somewhat at a loss,leading
to some centuries of comparative obscurity for the Peripatos.The Athens of
the early Hellenistic era was,after all,a relatively small town by modern stan-
dards,in which everybody knew everybody else,and where little in the way
of intellectual innovation could escape the notice,malevolent or otherwise,
of rival thinkers.
As I suggest above,this is perforce a rather speculative book,and no doubt
it will be criticized for that.What I have tried to do,at every stage,making the
assumption that the various figures with whom I am dealing were not philo-
sophical imbeciles,is to put the most favourable construction on the evidence
available to us that that evidence will allow of—miserable and tendentious
though it often is—in order to construct something like a coherent philo-
sophical theory for the individuals concerned.I have also tried to relate the
doctrines of the various Academics that emerge both to what we can discern
of Plato’s teaching,both written and oral,and to those of each other—bear-
ing in mind that there was no requirement of, or concern for, strict ‘ortho-
doxy’ within the school; simply a tendency to likemindedness on a set of
basic principles.
Preface
I am most grateful to various colleagues and friends for reading sections of
this work, and making constructive comments, Richard Sorabji, David
Sedley,Luc Brisson,and John Cleary,though they must not be held respon-
sible for what appears here.More remotely,I am much indebted to the work
of Harold Cherniss,both in The Riddle of the Early Academy,and in that mon-
ument of learning,Aristotle’s Criticism of Plato and the Academy,i (sadly,a pro-
ject never completed),and to that of his disciple Leonardo Tarán,both in his
magisterial collection of the fragments of Speusippus (Speusippus of Athens)
and in his excellent monograph on Philippus ofOpus,including an edition of
theEpinomis.I say this despite venturing to disagree with both of them in my
approach to the evidence.Their great virtue is to present so comprehensively
the evidence on which such disagreement may be based.I am much indebt-
ed,too,to the manifold works of Margherita Isnardi Parente,who has for so
long been a major authority in the field, and whose collection of the frag-
ments of Xenocrates—and Hermodorus!—(Senocrate–Ermodoro:frammenti)
is the definitive one, while her edition of the fragments of Speusippus
remains most useful. I have also benefited greatly from the work of Hans-
Joachim Krämer (Arete bei Platon und Aristoteles; Der Ursprung der
Geistmetaphysik; Platonismus und Hellenistische Philosophie), though without
going along with the full range of his speculations on Plato’s own ‘unwritten
doctrines’—preferable though I find them to the scepticism of Cherniss.
Mainly, I do not feel it necessary to postulate, as do the scholars of the
‘Tübingen School’,a fixed esoteric set ofdoctrines which Plato will have held
from the time when he began to compose the dialogues. I would envisage
something much more fluid and developmental—though without wishing to
deny that Plato always has much more in his head than he is putting down on
papyrus.
In conclusion,I wish to express my gratitude to Trinity College,Dublin,
and to my colleagues in the School of Classics,for providing a most conge-
nial atmosphere in which to work,and to the Oxford University Press,and to
Peter Momtchiloff in particular,for encouraging me in this enterprise,and
for their patience in seeing it through. Lastly, I am much indebted to the
friendly and constructive criticisms of the two anonymous readers for the
Press.
ii
This page intentionally left blank
Table of Contents
1. The Riddle of the Academy 1
The Physical Structure of the Academy 2
Plato’s Intellectual Legacy 16
2. Speusippus and the Search for an Adequate System of
Principles 30
Life and Works 30
Philosophy 40
3. Xenocrates and the Systematization of Platonism 89
Life and Works 89
Philosophy 98
4. Polemo, Champion of Ethical Praxis 156
Life and Works 156
Philosophy 159
5. Minor Figures 178
Philippus of Opus 179
Hermodorus of Syracuse 198
Heraclides of Pontus 204
Crantor of Soli 216
Conclusion 231
6. Epilogue:Arcesilaus and the Turn to Scepticism 234
References 239
General Index 245
Index of modern authorities quoted 249
Index of passages quoted 250