Chapter 13 Variations of Receptions of Plato during the Second Sophistic1

Ryan C. Fowler

Instances of Plato’s name, reference to his ideas, and quotations from his dia- logues can be found throughout texts written during the first few centuries of the Common Era,2 a period of time referred to in some studies as the Second Sophis- tic.3 While interest in Plato and his ideas had remained fairly consistent after his death, reference to Plato in the literature of this time period actually increases around the time of Antiochus of Ascalon’s move away from the skepticism of the New Academy in the early first century BCE.4 Plato’s presence becomes far-reach- ing by the first century CE, and subsequently explodes during the second and early third centuries. Platonic invocations can be found in the work of scholars interested in math and medicine, lexicographers and grammarians, and some of the early Christian apologists, as well as a number of authors who, because of the breadth of their work, defy easy categorization. This last relatively disparate group ­exemplifies responses to Plato and the dialogues during the this time period: in

1 I should like to thank the editors for perspicacious emendations and suggestions; thanks also to Amy Singer for her always helpful editorial eye. 2 Householder (1941), 44 provides a table based on the works of “14 Authors of Imperial Date” (i.e., Aelian, , Scholia on Aristophanes, Athenaeus, Demetrius, , Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Longinus, , Maximum [Maximus of Tyre?], Pausanius, , Julius Pollux, Rhetores Graeci [Spengel], and Lucian), which shows Plato second only to Homer in frequency of quotation or allusion (Euripides is listed third). For instances of the popularity of Plato during the second century, see De Lacy (1974), Trapp (1990), Anderson (1993), 173, and Boys-Stones (2001), 149. 3 I use the term “Second Sophistic” here to indicate a time period – spanning from the early first century into the third century CE (the edges of the period are somewhat blurred) – in which there was an engagement with and reaction to the language, , oratory, and phi- losophy of the classical Greek past. On the Second Sophistic, cf. Bowersock (1969), Anderson (1993), and Whitmarsh (2001) and (2005). Further, Plato’s authority in literary circles during the Second Sophistic seems to be paralleled by a growth in Plato’s authority among philoso- phers; on the philosophical authority of Plato, cf. Dillon (1977), Sedley (1997), Boys-Stones (2001), esp. 99–122, Tarrant and Baltzly (2006), and Sharples and Sorabji (2007). 4 Cf. Tarrant (1985) and (1993).

© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2018 | doi 10.1163/9789004355385_015 224 Fowler general, the types of texts produced during the Second Sophistic are, among other things, wide-ranging and diverse, and the receptions of Plato we have during this time reflect this aggregative, if not to say eclectic, literature. A number of authors during the Second Sophistic clearly signpost or even label their uses of Plato’s ideas and expressions. Sometimes what might seem a verbal echo of Plato could be part of a sentence or even be comprised by just one or two words from a dialogue; given the interest in displaying one’s erudition during the time period, that degree of allusiveness may sometimes have been the point.5 It is tempting to look for Plato everywhere during this time period, primarily because these texts seem to be replete with echoes of the Platonic dialogues themselves, as well as the ideas that came out of the Middle Platonic scholarship around the same time. As a result, to study the impact of Plato on the literature in the early centu- ries of the Common Era is to confront problematic terms such as “inspiration” and “allusion”, “confrontation” and “correction,” and “authority” and “appropriation”, among other slippery ideas included under the umbrella term “influence.” There are a number of expressions and images from Plato that take on lives of their own during the Second Sophistic and beyond. The phrase “assimilation to god as much as possible” (homoiōsis theōi kata to dunaton), which is found at Theaetetus 176b1–2, is an important formula that plays a role as man’s telos in both Middle Platonic and early Christian texts, and can be found around this time period among wide range of authors: e.g., Philo, Arius Didymus, Ga- len, Justin, Alcinous, Apuleius, Iranaeus, Albinus, Theon, Clement, Hippolytus, Origen and Plotinus.6 And this goal, in turn, is related to the Platonic goals of “following God” and of seeing God or the gods.7 For the Christian apologist Justin Martyr, the aim of Plato’s is to behold God directly, just as it is for the Greek Platonic Maximus of Tyre (both are discussed further,

5 Cf. De Lacy (1974), 6. On the pepaideuomenos (“cultivated man”) as author and member of the ideal audience, cf. Anderson (1989). 6 Philo, Opif. 69.1, et al.; Arius Didymus in Stobaeus 59, 1.15; Galen, Aff. Dig. 5.11.6 Kühn; Justin: fr. 17.2 Otto; Alcinous, Did. 28.1; Apuleius, De Plat. 2.23; Irenaeus, Adversus haereses 1.10.33; Theon, Expos. 15.20; Clement, Strom. 2.19.100.2.3; Hippolytus, Refutatio omnium haeresium 1.19.17.2; Origen, Homiliae in Lucam 39.220.7; Plotinus, Enn. I 2.4.28. For a dis- cussion of this formula, cf. Sedley (1999a). 7 Following god: cf. Phdr. 248b: “… that [soul] which is best follows after God and is most like him (ἡ μὲν ἄριστα θεῷ ἑπομένη καὶ εἰκασμένη)”; and 252c: “Now he who is a follower of Zeus, when seized by love can bear a heavier burden of the winged god,” et al. (trans.) Fowler­ (1914–1925). The idea is found in Apuleius De Plat. 2.23: “We call the wise man a “follower” and “imitator of God,” because we believe him to be following after God; that is, indeed [the meaning of the words]: “Follow God” [ἕπου θεῶ].” (my translation).