PROCLUS ON THE ELEMENTS AND THE CELESTIAL BODIES PHYSICAL TH UGHT IN LATE NEOPLAT NISM Lucas Siorvanes A Thesis submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy to the Dept. of History and Philosophy of Science, Science Faculty, University College London. Deuember 1986 - 2 - ABSTRACT Until recently, the period of Late Antiquity had been largely regarded as a sterile age of irrationality and of decline in science. This pioneering work, supported by first-hand study of primary sources, argues that this opinion is profoundly mistaken. It focuses in particular on Proclus, the head of the Platonic School at Athens in the 5th c. AD, and the chief spokesman for the ideas of the dominant school of thought of that time, Neoplatonism. Part I, divided into two Sections, is an introductory guide to Proclus' philosophical and cosmological system, its general principles and its graded ordering of the states of existence. Part II concentrates on his physical theories on the Elements and the celestial bodies, in Sections A and B respectively, with chapters (or sub-sections) on topics including the structure, properties and motion of the Elements; light; space and matter; the composition and motion of the celestial bodies; and the order of planets. The picture that emerges from the study is that much of the Aristotelian physics, so prevalent in Classical Antiquity, was rejected. The concepts which were developed instead included the geometrization of matter, the four-Element composition of the universe, that of self-generated, free motion in space for the heavenly bodies, and that of immanent force or power. Furthermore, the desire to provide for a systematic unity in explanation, in science and philosophy, capable of comprehending the diversity of entities and phenomena, yielded the Neoplatonic notion that things are essentially modes or states of existence, which can be arranged in terms of a causal gradation and described accordingly. Proclus, above anyone else, applied it as a scientific method systematically. Consequently, that Proclus' physical thought is embedded in his Neoplatonic philosophy is not viewed as something regrettable, but as proof of his consistent adherence to the belief, that there must be unity in explanation, just as there is one in the universe, since only the existence of such unity renders the cosmos rational and makes certainty in science attainable. 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Dedication and Acknowledgments 5 Preface 7 List of Primary Sources 12 Biographical and Historical Note 18 Part I. A guide to Proclus' system. 25 Section A. The general principles. Introduction 26 1. The triadic motif 28 2. "All things are in everything, but appropriately" 44 3. Similarity and Sympathy 48 Section B. The modes of existence. Introduction 52 1.1. The One 56 1.2. Limit and the Unlimited 61 1.3. The henads 67 2. Being, Substance 73 3. Life, Power 79 4. Intellect 85 5.1. Soul's general properties, and the Hypercosmic Soul 94 5.2. The World Soul 100 6. Nature 105 7. Space and Time 112 8.1. The celestial bodies 119 8.2. Celestial attendants and sublunary inhabitants 121 8.3. Cause and effect in the material world 125 8.4. The four Elements 128 8.5. Body, Matter, and the inverse hierarchy 129 (Table of contents cont.) 4 (Table of contents cont. from p.3). Part II. The physics of the Elements and the Celestial bodies. 140 Section A. The Elements of the Universe. Introduction 141 1. The Platonic background 142 2. The 15 Arguments 149 3. The properties of the Proclan Elements 163 4.1. The cosmological modes. General 178 4.2. Aether's status 190 4.3. Light 195 4.4. The Vehicle 201 5. The motion theory of the Elements 206 6. Space, Body and Matter 211 Section B. The celestial bodies. Introduction 218 1. The status of the celestial bodies 219 2. The celestial 225 3. The celestial body 234 4. Stars and spheres 243 5. The satellites 250 6.1. Celestial motion. General 255 6.2. The fixed stars, aAd the precession 261 6.3. The planets 270 7. The planetary order 282 8. Earth and the celestials 290 Review and Conclusion 294 List of quoted passages 302 Bibliography 309 to 321 - 5 - Dedicated most gratefully to George and Smaragda Siorvanes, Lisa Siorvanes, and Demetrios Soteropoulos, for all their unqualified support both moral and financial 6 Acknowledgments I should like to thank my supervisors, Prof. Piyo Rattansi of the Dept. of History and Philosophy of Science, and Dr. Robert Sharples of the Dept. of Classics, for the breadth and penetration of their comments, as well as their boundless patience and kindness. During the course, I was privileged to attend a number of seminars at the Institute of Classical Studies and Kings College London organized by Prof. Richard Sorabji, to whom I owe a special thanks for having made me sensitive to the subtleties and sophistication of ancient thought through the rigors of analytical philosophy. I also benefited from the immense knowledge of Neoplatonism (especially the later form) of Prof. Anthony C. Lloyd and Dr. Henry Blumenthal. In addition, I should like to express my gratitude to the late Dr. Charles Schmitt of Warburg Institute. I thank, also, Dr. Larry Schrenko of Washington University for his observations on the theory of place, and David Blow, a fellow Ph.D. student at the Dept. of History and Phil. of Science, for having brought to my attention a recent article on Proclus' life. An advantage of studying at the University College London is that one is placed conveniently within a short distance of among the best libraries in the world; I therefore thank the Librarians and staff of the following: University College London, Institute of Classical Studies, Warburg Institute, Senate House (University of London), British Library, Dept. of Greek and Roman Antiquities, British Museum, and Theosophical Society, London. Finally, I have pleasure in thanking Carolyn Moody for all her invaluable help. PREFACE This study explores the physical thought in late Neoplatonism, and focuses in particular on Proclus, the head of the Platonic School at Athens from about AD 437 until his death in 485. It offers a reconstruction and an examination of his views on the perennial subjects of ancient science and philosophy, the elements and the celestial bodies, within their philosophical enviroment. Two factors have influenced the choice of the subject-matter: the historical importance of the period, and the disproportionately scant scholarship devoted to it. Neoplatonism, the main intellectual movement of Late Antiquity, represents not only the final expression of ancient thought, but also the mode in which it was transmitted to the Islamic and to the Western European civilization, where it remained influential as an intellectual force even after Newton. Yet the amount of studies available is pityfully small by comparison to the earlier "Classical" period of Aristotle, Ptolemy and Galen, and the later periods of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. Much of the lack of interest may be traced to the persistent preconceptions about the so-called decline and fall of classical thought, the spread of superstition, and the rigidity and forbidding complexity of the philosophical systems of that time. Such opinions, which have become commonplace, became prevalent around the turn of the century, when the very term "Neo-Platonism" was coined in an effort to distinguish it from the original, "pure" form of Platonism. Although their echoes still survive, more recent and more penetrating scholarship has begun to acquaint us with both the dynamic changes of the period and its intellectual life. In the context of the history of science, S.Samburskyls unequalled work, "The Physical World of Late Antiquity", has afforded us glimses of the lively debate over those pillars - 8- of ancient science, Aristotelian physics (whose premises were critically examined and largely rejected) and Ptolemaic astronomy (whose cosmological value was questioned), and the innovative thinking on the role of mathematics in physics, and on the concept of space. But, even he admonishes Neoplatonic philosophy (p.xii) for having a "retarding and confusing influence on scientific thinking", because, inter alia, it adhered to "the irrational belief in the ultimate unity of the cosmos" (sic). Plainly, there is more to Neoplatonism. The combination of the exiguous amount of available or indeed known literature on the subject, and the limitations inherent in a thesis, led me to concentrate on the ideas of one individual thinker, rather than embark on a general assessment of many. Fortunately, Proclus provides a good balance, since he systematized comprehensively all the Neoplatonic versions before him and dominated the ones after him. Furthermore, it was under him, that Neoplatonism reached its peak of influence. Thus, he can be rightly considered the spokesman of Neoplatonism in general, and his concepts may be treated as representative of Neoplatonism as a whole. Although Plotinus was in a sense the originator of this form of Platonism, he stands, in many ways, much like the so-called flunparticipated cause" in Proclus' philosophy, outside mainstream Neoplatonism as it developed soon after his death. Trends of thought which were already present in Porphyry (Plotinus' student and compiler of his doctrines) were expanded and added to by Iamblichus. In the Athenian School and with Proclus they developed into the famous Neoplatonism which proved to be influential in Late Antiquity and beyond. This form of Neoplatonism (4th-6th c.)9 which effectively became the Neoplatonism, is usually called "late" Neoplatonism to distinguish it from the earlier forms, especially Plotinus'. The concentration on Proclus is more than justified, m reover, by the sheer number of his writings, the majority of which (L.J.Ros gn I s estimate is 3/5 th.) are extant.