sign in sign up
<<
Home , Alexandrian school, Cosmos, Dialogues (Deleuze book)

Revista Archai E-ISSN: 1984-249X [email protected] Universidade de Brasília Brasil

Motta, Anna THE VISIBLE OF . SOME HISTORICAL AND PHILOSOPHICAL REMARKS ABOUT IN THE LATE ANTIQUE SCHOOLS Revista Archai, núm. 12, enero-junio, 2014, pp. 11-18 Universidade de Brasília

Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=586161980002

How to cite Complete issue Scientific More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative desígnio 12 jan/jun 2014

THE VISIBLE COSMOS OF DIALOGUES. SOME HISTORICAL AND PHILOSOPHICAL REMARKS ABOUT

PLATO IN THE LATE ANTIQUE SCHOOLS * Anna Motta

MOTTA, A. (2014) The Visible Cosmos of Dialogues: Some Historical and Philosophical Remarks about Plato in the Late Antique Schools. Archai, n. 12, jan - jun, p. 11-18 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.14195/1984-249X_12_1

th th * MA in Classical Philology The harmonious disposition and the balance ABSTRACT: Between the 5 and the 6 centuries A.D., the at the University of Naples Neoplatonic school of , where the philosophical school- Federico II and Ph.D. in of the parties, through the compliance of a general Late Antique, Medieval and of convenience, determine the beauty of teaching follows a specific cursus studiorum, is opened also to Humanistic at the Christian students. Despite some divergences of religious University of Salerno a λόγος. As Plato says: (but also of economical and of political) , and after some 1. On this page see BRISSON (1987), p. 121-128 and Every speech (πάντα λόγον) must be composed as a violent events which occur in the Egyptian city, the Alexandrian BRISSON (2000), p. 209-218. living (ζῷον) that should have its own body (σῶμά school is linked to its contemporary Neoplatonic school in Ath- 2. Cf. also Procl. In Alc. I, 10, 1-16. τι ἔχοντα αὐτὸν αὑτοῦ), then it does not appear without ens. Indeed the Prolegomena to Platonic Philosophy, i.e. the 3. PLEZIA (1949), p. 86, head (μήτε ἀκέφαλον) and feet, but it has the parts of the introductory lectures discussed by an Anonymous professor in WESTERINK (1962), p. XLI = WESTERINK (1990), p. middle and those extremes written in a convenient way order to present the characteristics of Platonic philosophy, show LXXV and MANSFELD (1994), 1 p. 28 assume that ’ to one another and to the whole body (Phaedr. 264c) . that the method of teaching Plato is still the same. According introductions to to the Neoplatonic exegetical tradition, the text emphasizes and Plato were two distinct works. See also HADOT that the dialogical artefact fashioned as a cosmos by Plato is The quotation, from a dialogue considered (1990), p. 31, who, on theological in the ’ Canon, seems to me a paideutic instrument with the purpose to look away from the the contrary, believes in a united introduction to the right metaphor to submit, in this paper, a writ- sensible and to guide towards the intelligible. Plato, through Aristotle and Plato. dialogues, eikones of the invisible, does not create illusions, but ing that acts as the ‘head’ of Neoplatonic teaching, contributes to the practice of ‘assimilation’ by filling the writings as the proper introduction to Plato’s λόγοι, as the with greater contents. preliminary passage to be able to get the unity of the Neoplatonic system. KEY-WORDS: Plato, Prolegomena, analogy, visible cosmos, invisible cosmos. The importance of prologues and the role of the image of the dialogue as a single living being, harmonious with itself in all its parts, are underlined RESUMO: Entre os século V e VI d.C., a escola neoplatônica de Alexandria, onde a didática filosófica segue um preciso cursus in various ways by Proclus, who, moreover in a studiorum, é aberta também aos estudantes cristãos. Não obstan- passage of the Commentary on the First Alcibiades, te algumas diferenças de natureza religiosa (mas também econô- refers to what he has said “elsewhere” (καὶ ἐν 2 mica e política), e em seguida a alguns violentos acontecimentos ἄλλοις) about the dialogues in general . Unfortu- 3 que golpeiam a cidade egípcia, a escola de Alexandria permanece nately we don’t have any Proclus’ introductions , but

11 ligada à contemporânea escola neoplatônica ateniense. E, Platonic dialogues: here we can find a large number de fato, os Prolegomena à filosofia de Platão, isto é as of exegetical in quite explicit form. The 6 lições introdutórias dadas por um professor anônimo para text cannot be traced to any precise individual , apresentar as características da filosofia platônica, mostram but it can be attributed to the Alexandrian Neo- th que o método de ensinar Platão é ainda o mesmo. Seguindo platonic philosophical context of the 6 Century a tradição exegética neoplatônica, o texto sublinha que o A.D. The Westerink’s edition is based on the Vienna 4. Cf. also Procl. In Remp. I, 5, 38- artefato dialógico, plasmado como um cosmo por Platão, manuscript, the codex Vindobonensis phil. gr. 314, 39 and MANSFELD (1994), p. 22. 5. HADOT (1990), p. 35 and é um instrumento paidêutico que tem o objetivo desviar o written by John Grammaticus, a copy of the volume PLEZIA (1949), p. 26, p. 70 th olhar do sensível e guiar rumo ao inteligível. Platão, através compiled by Arethus of Caesarea (10 Century A.D.). want to derive the full-blown Neoplatonic schemata isagogica dos diálogos, eikones do invisível, não cria ilusões, mas The work is didactic, prescriptive and descriptive in from Porphyry, but MANSFELD contribui para a prática da “assimilação” preenchendo os nature and, precisely because of this, it is interest- (1994), p. 20 also talks about the influence of . escritos de maiores conteúdos. ing from the point of view of both form and content. 6. Because of the stratified PALAVRAS-CHAVES: Platão, Prolegomena, analogia, If we cannot say anything about the author, character of the text we can’t say anything about its author. The cosmo visível, cosmo invisível. on the contrary we can present briefly the complex Skowronski’s thesis, which ascribes the Prolegomena to Olympiodorus, historical and religious context of the Egyptian city is today not acceptable. In 1884 in order to construct the background to the school he argues that Olympiodorus we have the text that marks in Alexandria the path wrote this introduction comparing program. This context represents the essential of the ascent to Great Mysteries and proclaims not his texts with some sections framework which makes it possible to examine the of the Anonymous. But these only the unity of a single dialogue, but the unity analogies are not sufficient, role of the Neoplatonic school in Alexandria that, of the whole Platonic corpus in order to achieve a because – as Westerink has despite some divergences of various natures, is told – “none of these passages is single purpose. characteristic in the sense that linked to its contemporary Neoplatonic school in it expresses an opinion or The Late Neoplatonists discuss, in some in- . The sources from the Athenian school are of Olympiodorus not shared by troductory texts, a set of preliminary questions, also others. Even the exordium (for vital to this phase, given the scarcity of surviving which there is no traditional called “headings” or “main points” (κεφάλαια), in 7 formula in the introductions to sources from Alexandria . The two schools share order to clarify main issues. The importance of the Porphyry and Aristotle) sounds the same Neoplatonic teaching, but after 529 they like a commonplace. Several are κεφάλαια is underlined by Proclus who adds that demonstrably stock phrases. divide their . The Academy is closed instead […] Olympidorus is the only this is the “model” pertinent to all Platonic dialogues: 8 the School of Alexandria stays open . Alexandrian whose commentaries on Plato have been preserved, and, But the Justinian ordinance of closing the with rare exception, it is in this On which and how many headings (κεφάλαια) school is not the only imperial action against the part of his work that the parallels must be distinctly described before the reading in class occur” (WESTERINK 1962, p. XLVI = pagan . It is a real action, but among this WESTERINK 1990, p. LXXXII). of the Republic of Plato by those who wish to interpret 7. About the sources see MOTTA 4 and others more we can focus our attention on two it correctly (ὀρθῶς) (In Remp.I, 1, 3-5) . (2012). interesting attempts of limiting the pagan sphere of 8. Cf. SAFFREY (1954), p. 396-410, SEDLEY (1981), NAPOLI (2004), DI influence. The ‘quasi-Justinian laws’ of Zeno in the The text under our attention provides infor- BRANCO (2006), p. 131-179 and Codex Iustinianus show the character of a Christian NAPOLI (2008), p. 75-89. mation concerned with eleven sections. It presents age in which pagan philosophy is seen as dangerous: preliminary matters to be treated and discussed be- moreover they seem to mark the differences between fore the study of Plato’s works may begin, before the the fortunes of the two schools. The first ‘quasi-law’ συνανάγνωσις of Platonic dialogues according to 5 denied the legality of testaments or gifts or anything a schema isagogicum , as we can read: given to persons or places for the support of the impi- ety of Hellenism. This law takes aim as well at attempts The prolegomena to our joint reading of Plato’s - to increase the endowments that supported the late sophical works, comprised in eleven sections (ἐν ἕνδεκα ) Hellenic παιδεία and its religious institutions. The κεφαλαίοις περικλεσθέντα (Prol. 28, 1-3). second ‘quasi-law’ has a very important clause: it sets out to deny pagan professors of the Greek παιδέια The Anonymous Prolegomena to Platonic the right to teach their ‘particular’ academic disciplines Philosophy, that is the complete title, are a that destroy the of their students: compendium of speculation on the nature of the

12 desígnio 12 jan/jun 2014 We forbid every (πᾶν δὲ μάθημα) to be we can argue that the nature of the agreement is taught by those who are sick with the madness of the economical and political. However about the charge Hellenes, that they might not according to this rule of opportunism and about the contents of the 17 teach those who miserably approach them and destroy agreement the studies have divergent opinions . the souls of the persons supposedly studying with The method of teaching Plato doesn’t change them (ταῖς δὲ ἀληθείαις τὰς τῶν δῆθεν παιδευ- necessarily in Alexandria. The text quoted from

9. That is the why we ομένων διαφθείρειν ψυχάς) (Cod. Iust. 1.11.10). doesn’t say anything about the teaching speak about ‘quasi laws’ according but only about money: in fact we know that in these to TROMBLEY (1993-1994), vol. I, 18 p. 327 ss. We have no convincing evidence that these years Ammonius is in some financial troubles . So 9 10. We assign these ‘quasi-laws’ Zeno’s laws carried into effect . For instance the en- what it’s possible is that the social, economical to 482-484, as Damascius reports in his work; see Dam. Vita Is. fr. dowments administered by the diadochoi in Athens and religious situation could had forced Ammonius 10 265, p. 213. survives the ‘quasi-Justinian laws’ . Photius’ sum- to compromise with the Christian institution: the 11. Cf. Dam. Vita Is., Epit. Phot. 158, p. 212. mary of the Vita Isidori puts the endowment of 1000 school of Alexandria already before Illus was a public 12. Cf. Dam. Vita Is., fr. 264, p. 213. 11 13. Among the Hellenes who solidi just in the of Proclus and moreover the institution (that is an important from rallied to Illus we find the rhetor Atenian decurion Theagenes, called φιλόδωρος τε Athenian school) founded on public funds. After Pamprepius, who holds important imperial posts in Costantinople καὶ μεγαλόδωρος, adds monies out of his own Illus the imperial court must have cast distrustful 12 and has many friends with similar pocket for the philosophical institute of Athens . glances on men like Ammonius: the views in Alexandria. 14. Philoponoi are a confraternity If these and others private acts of generosity were prominent supporters of Illus and Ammonius, of laymen whose members are come during Marinus’ tenure as diadochos, Zeno who was a publicly funded teacher, was to especially dedicated Christians; for further information see HAAS could have allowed the force of the law to lapse close official scrutiny. This historical background (1997), p. 238-240. after the successful suppression of Illus’ revolt and some matters are useful to demonstrate that 15. About these facts see WATTS 13 (2005), p. 204-261. (481-488) . This was a pagan’s rebellion against the school of Alexandria in the Late Antiquity is 16. Cf. Dam. Vita Is., fr. 316, the emperor Zeno raised by Illus, magister militum p. 251 (= Ep. Phot. 292): ὁ δὲ a pagan institution, but it must come to terms to Ἀμμώνιος αἰσχοκερδὴς ὢν καὶ per Orientem, and his pagan faction of philosophers survive. It is probably that the result of the agree- πάντα ὁρῶν εἰς χρηματισμòν ὁντιναοῦν ὁμολογίας τίθεται and rhetoricians who wanted to throw off the yoke ment is a school open also to Christian students like πρòς τòν ἐπισκοποῦντα of a Christian empire. So the emperor could have . So although the teaching extends τηνικαῦτα τὴν κρατοῦσαν δόξαν. The Neoplatonists remain regarded the crowd of Hellenic philosophers, i.e. across religious divides, it seems that the Christian- largely invisible in the political the of the rebellion, as something of little ity hasn’t a deep influence on the Neoplatonic way . VAN DEN BERG (2005), p. 19 112 says that “living unnoticed, . The state apparatus could not expeditiously to teach Plato . once an Epicurean vice, was suppress every pagan activity, although the degree The ‘theistic’ system – as Praechter called turned into a Pythagorean, and hence Platonic, virtue”. of Christian belief varied considerably by locality Hierocles’ (PRAECHTER 1912, p. 1-27) Indeed Damascius, in his Life of Isidore, often like here, criticizes and with the attitude of each individual monk or – and the interpretation of Aristotle’s according persons who, instead of pursuing bishop and his congregation. Now it’s impossible to to Ammonius seem rather inspired by pre-Plotinian philosophy, devote himself entirely to political office. overlook that Alexandria is the seat of one of the and not so much by : Ilsetraut 17. For bibliography on the most important episcopate of the Late Antiquity. Hadot has demonstrated the fact that Hierocles historiographical problems see D’ANCONA (2005). Moreover I think we could link up the increase of nowhere refers to a principle above the Demiurge 14 18. Cf. Dam. Vita Is. fr. 124, p. 105. activities of philoponoi in Alexandria after the Illus’ and therefore this topic doesn’t imply that his 19. For example, Zacharia Scholastichus’ dialogue, insurrection (and also after the Paralio’s conversion philosophy is theistic (HADOT 1978, p. 189-171). 15 Ammonius, shows Ammonius’ to Christianity ) with the secret agreement between Also the Ammonian metaphysics simplification isn’t adherence to the doctrine of the of the world. Ammonius and Peter Mongus, the patriarch of Al- influenced by Christianity – as Verrycken has shown This text seems to reveal the bitterness that the philoponoi exandria. Damascius speaks about this act defining (VERRYCKEN 1990, p. 199-231) – although Praechter 16 felt towards Ammonius and his Ammonius as an opportunist (αἰσχοκερδής) . In- was not completely wrong in ascribing to Ammonius a teaching. Indeed, in the opening, Ammonius is described as an deed if we associate the ‘quasi-two laws’, an attempt regressive tendency. But not in all cases, we can say Athenian teacher who has come to limit the pagan teaching estimated unnecessary that the system is simplified because of the prepara- to Alexandria and teaches in such a way that he brings the of and not carried into effect, with the admission of tory level of the texts. Unfortunately we have a lot many teachers into harmony; cf. some Christian students in the Neoplatonic school, of Alexandrian commentaries on Aristotle and only Zach. Amm. 19-24.

13 very few texts on Plato, so we cannot compare with stresses on the benefits brought by the philosophy: satisfactory results this production and the Athenian it is a great good (ἀγαθόν) and a gift of God, is 26 one. However, according to Saffrey, if Ammonius divine and can make the like a God . 20 gives up teaching Platonic philosophy – as Ascle- David, who in order to conclude his introductory 20. It’s certain that he writes a pius and Olympiodorus refer – the agreement with lectures, picks up the quotation of the same pas- commentary on the Phaedo (cf. the Church probably doesn’t the teaching of sage of the Timaeus which had been chosen by Elias Olymp. In Phaed. 7, 5; 8, 17; 10, 7) and on the Gorgias (cf. Olymp. In Plato (SAFFREY 1954, p. 400-401). So if we have not to introduce, affirms that philosophy is a gift from Gorg. 39, 2) and some lectures on confirmation in the texts, we may say that, about God and its function is to confer prestige to the Theaetetus (cf. Ascl. In Met. 70, 31). 21. Indeed Ammonius may the general method of teaching Plato, the Athenian souls and bring them to the corporeality to what is have preferred to develop his 27 Neoplatonic and harmonizing and Alexandrian school are linked, although every divine . The divine man, or rather the one who is exegesis of Aristotle. This could 21 philosopher has his theory and his preferences . closer to the divine, is the philosopher, but not all also be the reason why the Platonic works were felt to be less In the Prolegomena the general method of teaching philosophers are divine: Aristotle and Chrysippus important. Plato follows the Neoplatonic exegetical tradition, extremely greedy for knowledge, referring, in fact, 22. The character of mistakes that we found (for instance wrong but sometimes the teacher, or in all probability the only to the study of what is human, do not attain names of dialogues, of persons 22 student , who sorts out the notes on the lectures the divine wisdom. Aristotle is for the Anonymous and other inaccuracies) let us tell that the Prolegomena are not 28 of Plato, handles some argument with care: the text only δαιμόνιος like happens in Syrianus : his be destined for publication or seems to show respect also for the Christian cluster in study is the necessary to continue the circulation outside the school. ὄργανον We cannot forget that sometimes 29 the school. The teaching program shows the attempt cognitive ascent . The Stagirite, together with commentaries and introductions are ἀπò φωνῆς: they are not to defend Plato against the charge of πολυδοξία Chrysippus, remains – in accordance with Damascius physically written by professors, through sharp examples of hermeneutics. So the – φιλομαθῆς: θεῖοι are only Plato and , but also by students. See RICHARD (1950), p. 191-222. Anonymous, through a synergy between philosophi- winged souls who dwell above the , in the 23. Cf. MANSFELD (1994), p. 108- 30 cal, rhetorical and poetic structures, doesn’t give plain of and in the meadow of divine ideas . 113, HADOT (1984), p. 201 ss. and HOFFMANN (2000), p. 611-612. up to introduce Plato as θεῖος ἀνήρ and guide However, one of the aspects perhaps more 24. Cf. Plat. Tim. 47b. (καθηγητῆς) of divine wisdom: the harmonious interesting of the Prolegomena, that I would try to 25. El. Prol. phil. 2, 1. 26. Cf. Plat. Theaet. 176b. About unity of his life, his writings and doctrine show the examine here, is a sort of ‘recasting’ of the tale of this see LAVECCHIA importance of Hellenic towards the attain- the Timaeus where, in the original way, the dialogue (2006), passim and O’MEARA παιδεία (2003), p. 31-49. ment of knowledge of divine truth. Such knowledge is presented as a visible cosmos and Plato as the 27. Cf. Dav. Prol. phil. 79, 1. 28. Cf. Syr. In Met. 86, 7; 115, is the goal of all philosophy and it can be reached literary analogue of the cosmic Demiurge. In the 25; 168, 6; 192, 16. On Syrianus’ through progressive stages that prepare to the study Timaeus, the visible cosmos is a visible living crea- criticism see CARDULLO (1995) 23 and (2000). of Platonic philosophy . ture embracing all that are visible (ζῷον ὁρατὸν 29. Cf. El. In An. Post. 123, 9-11. The assumption of a teleological perspective τὰ ὁρατὰ περιέχον), a sensible divinity that is 30. Cf. Dam. Vita Is. fr. 36, p. 60 (= Epit. Phot. 36). In fact, Plato on the analysis of the whole writing makes us pos- the image of the intelligible divinity (εἰκὼν τοῦ is presented in the Prolegomena 31 sible to detect some exegetical and metaphysical νοητοῦ θεὸς αἰσθητός) . The consideration of as a wingless student. After ’ teaching is able to find structures constitutive of the Neoplatonic teach- these statements is the starting point of the third those wings that in the Phaedrus ing in Late Antiquity. It is not superficial a text of Prolegomena, quoted below: (246d6-8) represent the part κεφάλαιον that has been taken part to the in which, for example, the bios does not offer a divine and makes possible to rise him up (ἄγειν ἄνω, Phaedr. detailed progression of the episodes of Plato’s life: For just as God has made some parts of his crea- 247d6). The philosopher, in the more important is the relationship established with tion invisible, namely all incorporeal , angels, Republic (500c9-501b7), is divine and orderly so far as a man is the divine, which is able to ensure the privileged souls, , etc., others, however, subject to conceded, just because he sees access of the philosopher to the intelligible truth. our and visible, such as for example the and contemplates the ordered and always unchanged . It makes him the bearer of that divine gift, this heavenly bodies and the world of coming-to-be and 31. Cf. Plat. Tim. 92c4; 27c-29d; is precisely the philosophy that in the Timaeus is passing-away, so Plato too (οὕτως καὶ αὐτός) has 30c-d. 32. See also Procl. In Crat. IV, 24 necessary for the improvement of the human life . handed on some of his ideas in writing and some by 16-18; III, 10-11; VI, 11-14; VIII, 11-13; XI, 2-4, where the author This aspect also characterizes the Prolegomena word of mouth, like incorporeal entities, imperceptible conceives the words as εἰκόνες of Philosophiae that are the more general protreptici to the senses, namely what he said in his lectures the intelligible. 25 32 in philosophy. In his introductory lectures Elias (Prol. 13, 18-25) .

14 desígnio 12 jan/jun 2014 The possibility to see in Plato a divine artisan moving together, as stated by Socrates in seems to me, however, an idea already foreseen the Cratylus. The music divinely inspired is close to the in the section of the Prolegomena in which the philosopher (διὸ καὶ τὴν ἔνθεον μουσικὴν παρὰ Alexandrian professor expresses his personal views τῷ φιλοσόφῳ πρώτως) (In Remp. I, 57, 10-17). about the development of various philosophical doctrines of the antiquity. So in his program the The philosophy, the highest form of music, Anonymous shows the συμφωνία between the dif- harmonizes the with the entire : with ferent theological traditions, an essential aspect in this kind of philosophy Plato, the best musician, may 33 the Athenian school . He cites firstly the αἵρεσις bring order to everything and celebrate the divine. of poets Orpheus, Homer, Musaeus and Hesiod. Plato, to which in the bios of the Prolegomena are Plato has just learned from them to enhance the associated ‘symbols’ commonly attributed to poets, is order of the universe. Nevertheless, he is superior to the one that – as stated clearly in Proclus – by imitat- the poets because, while they have spoken with no ing the cosmic activity of μουσηγέτης, becomes the 33. Cf. Procl. Theol. Plat. I, 5, 25- evidence, he has demonstrated the truth of his words creator of a cosmos of high music. The philosopher, 26, 4 and Iambl. Vita Pyth. 46. 34 34. Cf. Anon. Prol. 7, 19-24. and has used the with correctness . It is clear divinely inspired, writes because he ‘sees’ and his writing 35. Cf. Plat. Symp. 205c. 38 36. Cf. Anon. Prol. 1, 26-33; 1, that Plato is not only a poet when he ‘creates’ the is a ‘put before the eyes’ : it is the sight – as stated in 54-60; 2, 15-29. dialogues but he is, in a broader sense, a demiurge. the Timaeus and in accordance with a typical conception 37. Plat. Phaed. 61b. 38. See also Arist. Rhet. III, Actually the philosophical work, in the presentation of the Greek thinking – the most powerful and effective 39 1411b22 and Poet. 17, 1455b23. of the Anonymous, does not exclude the . In of our senses . From the observation of the reality is 39. Cf. TATARKIEWICZ (1976), p. 105-197; 355-381. addition, every production – for Plato – is poetry: derived the stimulus to the reasoning, and then to the 35 40. Cf. also Anon. Prol. 1, 5. adapted from the Symposium , all demiurges might philosophy, and from the observation of the order of 41. About the use of metaphor cf. ECO (1984), p. 161-165. be called ‘poets’ because their activity involves a ‘cre- the cosmos, derives the criterion by which adjusting ation’; nevertheless, some call ‘poets’ only the men our behavior in intellectual and moral terms. It is no who deal with music and verses. It doesn’t astonish coincidence that the Prolegomena start with the well- that the Demiurge in the Timaeus is defined as the known opening words of Aristotelian Metaphysics. The ποιητὴς καὶ πατήρ: his work, like the poet one, senses are tools of human knowledge, because through 40 μίμησις of a paradigm, is also a γένεσις. the sensible objects we reach the reminiscence . Even if the creative activity belongs to the In this perspective, the image becomes an poet and to the philosopher, the demiurgic product educational tool for mediation: it brings a message is different. In the Phaedo – the dialogue whose able to connect, making evident the different levels exegesis comes from the Anonymous primarily to of reality because the whole universe is pervaded by 41 underline, in the new reading of the image of the an analogy . According to Proclus, in the Prolegom- 36 swan, the Apollonian character of Plato – Socrates ena, Plato seems to have understood the invisible receives in a dream the invitation to compose and structure of the cosmos and the iconic relationship perform music, as the philosophy was the hightest between the intelligible and the sensible: so, only 37 music . If the highest form of music is the phi- through the medium of images, he can represent losophy, Proclus can argue that this is moreover: the divine cosmos. The testimony of Proclus is, once again, essential to clarify this . Βy comparing The most intense form of love, because the philoso- the two dialogues which conclude the Neoplatonic phy does not grant any money, but the soul itself with curriculum, he writes: the most perfect form of harmony, whereby the soul is able to bring order to everything concerning men, and at The whole of philosophy being divided into study the same time, to raise in a perfect way in honor of intelligible and study of immanent things – quite of the divinity, imitating the same μουσηγέτης, which rightly too, as cosmos too is twofold, intelligible cosmos celebrates the Father with intellectual songs and holds and sensible cosmos as Plato will go on to say – the together the entire universe with indissoluble bonds, has embraced the treatment of intelligibles,

15 and the Timaeus that of the sensibles. That one, you μιμούμενος, and is able to get the analogy see, teaches us all the divine orders, and this one all the between macrocosm and microcosm. In fact, the processions of things in the cosmos. But neither does Anonymous writes: the former entirely leave aside the study of things within the All, nor does the latter fail to study the intelligi- As we have seen, then, that the dialogue is a cos- ble, because sensible too are present paradigmatically mos and the cosmos a dialogue, we may expect to find in the intelligibles (τὰ αἰσθητὰ ἐν τοῖς νοητοῖς all the components of the universe in the dialogue. ἐστι παραδειγματικῶς), while the intelligibles are The constituents of the universe are these: matter present iconically among sensible (καὶ τὰ νοητὰ ἐν (ὕλη), form (εἶδος), nature (φύσις) – which unites τοῖς αἰσθητοῖς εἰκονικῶς) (In Tim. I, 132, 21-27). form with matter –, soul (ψυχή), (νοῦς) and divinity (θεότης) (Prol. 16, 3-7). The analogy – the most important type of 42 metaphor, as Aristotle confirms – here is the privi- Proclus also says in the Commentary on the leged instrument of the philosopher: this rhetoric First Alcibiades that dialogue must show close 42. Arist. Rhet. III 1411 a1; cf. PALUMBO (2008), p. 538 ss. figure is what permits to switch constantly from one analogies with the All according to five points of 43. Cf. Procl. In Alc. I, 10, 1-16. 44. Cf. Plat. Tim. 30a; Tim. 52d-53b. world to another. But in order to get such analogy is reference (he omits, however, the nature) Good, Cf. also Procl. El. Theol. 103. 43 necessary that a similarity derives from the equality , Soul, Form and matter . It is therefore 45. Cf. Anon. Prol. 17, 40-48. 46. Cf. Arist. Poet. 6, 1450a22-23; between four elements, for example, be- evident that the text is the opening to a literary 6, 1450a38; 23, 1459a16-20. tween things totally different, such as the Demiurge microcosm in which the hierarchies present in the 47. Cf. also Plat. Tim. 46c- 47c. 48. Cf. Procl. In Tim. I, 271, 11-15 and Plato, and the world and the dialogues. What macrocosm are reflected and in which the Demiurge and 335, 21-23. Cf. also Procl. In 44 the Anonymous creates is the following connection: works to harmonize all the diversity of creation . Parm. III, 831, 11-13; In Remp. I, 32, 27-29; Syr. In Met. 117, 20-25. the Demiurge moulds the visible cosmos as Plato In this way in the Prolegomena to the matter moulds the dialogues. Plato resembles the Demiurge of the universe concerns the setting for the work, as well as the relationship between Plato and the the characters involved, the circumstances of the dialogues resembles the relationship between the action; to the cosmic form the style; to the nature Demiurge and the sensible cosmos. If the dialogue the method of exposition; to the soul the argu- were not a properly Platonic creation, between the ments; to the intellect the problem examined; to Demiurge and Plato would not exist metaphor. This the divinity the end of the composition. So if the analogy permits to consider the analogical rela- Good is that in view of which the dialogue is writ- tionship between the One and the σκοπός of the ten, the analogy between a theory of the six causes dialogues. If the One is the inexhaustible source, (material, formal, efficient, exemplary, instrumental absolutely unique and simple from all that exists, and final) and the literary production is also justi- 45 in a similar way, the σκοπός, by harmonizing all fied: here the Good is clearly the final cause . In the elements of the universe present in individual fact God creates, being aware of the good that his dialogues, gives completeness and unity to each creation brings. The Good is the reason why it is 46 single λόγος and makes it a literary microcosm that created and the aim, the cause of creation itself . 47 can reflect the structure of the universe-macrocosm Similarly and according to Timaeus 29d-30a , the (COULTER 1976, p. 95-126). The Anonymous builds relationship between creator and artifact is seen 48 an educational way to reach the divine truth: in in terms of final cause . This one is then the fact by capturing the similarities and relationships speculative-philosophical foundation on which is between macrocosm and microcosm, he makes the based the literary theory of unity as it is expressed invisible available for learning. by the Anonymous: The supreme literary artist is thus the organiz- ing mind that holds together, by giving harmony, One or many: we must maintain that a dialogue has the components of the dialogic universe. He is one theme, not many. How indeed could Plato treat the one who ‘makes visible’, ἐν τούτῳ τὸ θεῖον more than one theme in a dialogue, when he praises

16 desígnio 12 jan/jun 2014 the deity for the very reason that is one (τò θεῖον ὅτι The terms in which the literary theory is ἕν ἐστιν)? Besides, he says himself that the dialogue exposed make evident the fortune of the exegesis is like (ἔοικεν) a living being, because it is a λόγος; of the passage of the Phaedrus quoted at the begin- any well-written piece of can be compared ning and of course the Neoplatonic exegesis of the (ἀναλογεῖ) to a living being; if, then, the dialogue Timaeus. The report with the Unity is the greatest is comparable to a living being, and a living being has concern of the Neoplatonic philosophers that make only one purpose, the Good (for the sake of which it has full use of the metaphor of Phaedrus and of the tale 55 been created), the dialogue must also have one purpose, of Timaeus , and it is also what joins the different that is, one theme (ἕνα σκοπόν) (Prol. 21, 23-32). schools: if a work has not literary unity, determined not only by its biological structure but also by its Therefore, if the various literary elements are purpose, that is the Good, it may not be intelligible similar to a theological level or metaphysical reality, or Beautiful. The Beautiful is related to the Good: there is no other way to speak about the metaphysi- it is the way in which, since , the Good is 56 49. About the Demiurge in cal reality, in the educational field, that building a at the level of the sensible cosmos . Plotinus see OPSOMER (2006). 50. Cf. Plot. Enn. II 9 [33], model able to express in a figurative way that what However, the argument that predicts the 6.1-62. 51. Iambl. De myst. 168, 11-15 the philosopher thinks is the nature of that reality. metaphors, invites us to consider the possibility that and 171, 17-172, 9. About the The demiurgic model is not yet easy to manage: for the use of a demiurgic image, with the combination importance of the representation of the invisible cf. also Porph. Peri example, Plotinus considers that the schemes of the of Plato to the divinely inspired poets, is born here, 49 agalm. fr. 1. craft production do not suit a Demiurge . Actually he in primis, from the necessity to justify the adoption 52. Cf. Anon. Prol. 5, 51-52. 53. BONFIGLIOLI (2008), p. criticizes the superfluous inventions of the Gnostics, of a philosophical writing. In fact, in an educational 129 says that “nel tardoantico, among which there is the Demiurge borrowed from field, before teaching the truth of the Plato’s doc- i confini imposti dalla ricerca 50 filosofica attraverso le parole Plato . Plotinus’ philosophy, which denounces the trine, it has been necessary to liberate the divine sono confini troppo stretti, errors in the image, does not represent the herme- philosopher, man of the Muses, from any charge of perché è lo stesso pensiero filosofico che supera le soglie neutic way pursued by Iamblichus who says that incoherence. The adoption of a written form for the della sua identità per aprirsi ad altre suggestioni. Suggestioni the art of making images is at a great distance from transmission of his teaching is in contradiction with che parlano essenzialmente di the Demiurge who creates real beings, because the his initial preference, on the example of Socrates rimozioni o almeno di tendenza alla rimozione: dell’assenza, del production reverses the sense of divine production. and Pythagoras, for a continuation of disciples, falso, del rinvio”. In fact, the God produces from the Intelligibility, real living books. The ἀπορία of the dialogues – 54. Cf. COULTER (1976), p. 39-60. 57 55. BRISSON (2000), p. 216 writes the man from the matter: so all the images, that do as defined by the Anonymous – can be overcome that “l’assimilation du lógos au not refer to the divine and which are not based on only by approaching analogically the composition kósmos comme être vivant subit 51 un glissement significatif de la his power, “goes up in smoke” . of literature to the demiurgic creation with its bio- biologie vers la téléologie”. In light of this, the dialogue, creature of the logical and teleological reliefs. The justification for 56. Cf. Plot. Enn. VI 9 [9], 11. 57. Cf. Anon. Prol. 13, 4. divine platonic δημιουργεῖν, is not important as a using dialogues, living being in this visible cosmos, well-defined literary genre, instead is important that through an exegetical procedure that uses the anal- to which the image refers, or rather, the intelligibil- ogy, aims to introduce the philosophical wisdom, ity. The creation of images, activity usually related, also in Alexandria, as a divine revelation. but not always with a positive sense, to the poets, becomes a mean of transmission of philosophical Bibliography λόγοι. What in fact escapes the gaze of the mind 52 cannot escape the “third eye” of Plato . Through BONFIGLIOLI, S. (2008) Agalma. Icone e simboli tra the dialogues, εἰκόνες of the invisible, he does Platone e il neoplatonismo, Bologna, Pàtron Editore. not create illusions, but contributes to the practice BRISSON, L. (1987) Le discours comme univers et l’univers of ‘assimilation’ by filling the written with greater comme discours, in COSTANTINI, M.; LALLOT, J. (1987) 53 Le texte et ses représentations, Paris, Presses de l’École and divine contents . Plato is precisely mediator normale supérieure., p. 121-128. through the literature between the invisible and BRISSON, L. (2000) Lectures de Platon, Paris, Vrin. 54 visible, between the intelligible and the sensible .

17 CARDULLO, R. L. (1995) Siriano esegeta di Aristotele, vol. OPSOMER, J. (2006) To find the Maker and Father. Proclus’ I, Frammenti e testimonianze dei Commentari all’Organon. exegesis of Plato’s Tim. 28c3-5, Études platoniciennes II, Introduzione, testo, traduzione e commento, Firenze, La p. 261-283. Nuova Italia. PALUMBO, L. (2008) Μίμησις. Rappresentazione, teatro e CARDULLO, R. L. (2000) Siriano esegeta di Aristotele, mondo nei dialoghi di Platone e nella Poetica di Aristotele, vol. II, Frammenti e testimonianze del Commentario Napoli, Loffredo. alla Fisica. Introduzione, testo, traduzione e commento, PRAECHTER, K. (1912) Christlich-neuplatonische Catania, CUECM. Beziehungen, Byzantinische Zeitschrift n. 21, p. 1-27. COSTANTINI, M.; LALLOT, J. (1987) Le texte et ses PRATO, G. (2000) I Manoscritti greci tra riflessione e représentations, Paris, Presses de l’École normale dibattito. Atti del V Colloquio Internazionale di paleografia supérieure. greca (Cremona, 4-10 ottobre 1998), Firenze, Edizioni COULTER, J. A. (1976) The Literary Microcosm. Theory of Gonnelli. Interpretation of the Later Neoplatonists, Leiden, Brill. RICHARD, M. (1950) Ἀπὸ φωνῆς, Byzantion n. 20, p. D’ANCONA, C. (2005) Il neoplatonismo alessandrino: 191-222. alcune linee della ricerca contemporânea. Adamantius SAFFREY, H. D. (1954) Le chrétien Jean Philophon et la n. 11, p. 9-38. survivance de l’École d’Alexandrie au Ve siècle, Revue des DI BRANCO, M. (2006) La città dei filosofi. Storia di Atene Études grecques n. 67, p. 396-410. da Marco Aurelio a Giustiniano. Con un’appendice su ‘Atene SEDLEY, D. N. (1981) The end of the Academy, Phronesis immaginaria’ nella letteratura bizantina, Prefazione di G. n. 26, p. 65-75 Pugliese Carratelli, Firenze, Leo S. Olschki. SMITH, A. (2005) The Philosopher and Society in Late ECO, U. (1984) Semiotica e filosofia del linguaggio. Torino, Antiquity. Essay in Honour of Peter Brown, Swansea, The Einaudi. classical Press of Wales. HAAS, C. (1997) Alexandria in the Late Antiquity: SORABJI, R. (1990) Aristotle Transformed. The Ancient Topography and Social Conflict, Baltimore – London, J. Commentators and their Influence, London, Duckworth. Hopkins University Press. TATARKIEWICZ, W. (1979) Storia dell’estetica, vol. I, HADOT, I. (1978) Le problème du Néoplatonisme alexandrin. L’estetica antica, Torino, Piccola Biblioteca Einaudi. Hiéroclès et Simplicius, Paris, Études Augustiniennes. TROMBLEY, F. R. (1993-1994) Hellenic Religion and HADOT, I. (1984) Arts libéraux et philosophie dans la pensée Christianization, p.370-529, vol. 2, Leiden, Brill antique, Paris, Vrin. VAN DEN BERG, R. (2005) Live Unnoticed! The Invisible HADOT, I. (1990) Commentaire sur les ‘Catégories’ d’Aristote. Neoplatonic Policitian, in The Philosopher and Society in Chapitres I et III. Traduction commentée sous la direction Late Antiquity. Essay in Honour of Peter Brown, Swansea, de I. Hadot, Leiden - New York, Brill. The classical Press of Wales, p. 101-115. HOFFMANN, Ph. (2000) Bibliothèques et formes du livre VERRYCKEN, K. (1990) The metaphysics of Ammonius à la fin de l’antiquité. Le témoignane de la littérature son of Hermeias, in Aristotle Transformed. The Ancient néoplayonicienne des Ve et VIe siècles, in PRATO, G. I Commentators and their Influence, London, Duckworth, Manoscritti greci tra riflessione e dibattito.Atti del V p. 199-231. Colloquio Internazionale di paleografia greca (Cremona, 4-10 ottobre 1998), Firenze, Edizioni Gonnelli., p. 601-632. WATTS, E. J. (2005) City and School in Late Antique Athens and Alexandria, Berkeley - Los Angeles - London, University LAVECCHIA, S. (2006) Una via che conduce al divino: la of California Press. homoiosis theo nella filosofia di Platone, prefazione di T.A. Szlezák, Milano, Vita e Pensiero WESTERINK, L. G. (1962) Anonymous Prolegomena to Platonic Philosophy. Introduction, Text, Translation and MANSFELD, J. (1994) Prolegomena. Questions to be settled Indices by L. G. Westerink, Amsterdam, North-Holland before the study of an author, or a text, Leiden - New Publishing Company. York - Köln, Brill. WESTERINK, L. G. (1990). Anonyme, Prolégomènes à la MOTTA, A. (2012) La tarda scuola neoplatonica di philosophie de Platon. Texte établi par L. G. Westerink et Alessandria: aspetti dell’Introduzione alla filosofia di traduit par J. Trouillard, avec la collaboration de A.-Ph. Platone, Atena e Roma N.S. 5, p. 35-46 Segonds, Paris, Les Belles Lettres. NAPOLI, V. (2004) Note sulla chiusura della Scuola neoplatonica di Atene, Schede Medievali n. 42, p. 53-95. NAPOLI, V. (2008) Ἐπέκεινα τοῦ ἑνός. Il principio totalmente ineffabile tra dialettica ed esegesi in Damascio, Artigo recebido em dezembro de 2012, Catania - Palermo, CUECM - Officina di studi Medievali. aprovado em junho de 2013. O’MEARA, D. J. (2003) Platonopolis. Platonic Political Philosophy in Late Antiquity, Oxford, Clarendon Press.

18