Table Of ContentCotntnentationes
Societas Scientiarum Fennica
Commentationes Physico-Mathematicae Humanarutn Litterarum
Commentationes Biologicae
Commentationes Humanarum Litterarum
Commentationes Scientiarum Sod .lium 52 1974
Bidrag till kannedom av Finlands natur och folk
?
Arsbok - Vuosikirja
1
Commentationes Humanarum Litterarum f5
l The series has appeared since 1923, having earlier formed a part of the series v·5J.
OFVERSIGT AF FINSKA VETENSKAPS-SOCIETETENS FORHANDLINGAR 1839-1923, I
and appears at irregular intervals.
Contributions (in a congress language) will be communicated by a member
of the Society.
Editor: Prof. Henrik Zilliacus, Parkgatan 9, Helsingfors 14.
Requests for exchange: Societas Scientiarum Fennica, Snellmansgatan 9-11,
Helsingfors 17 I Snellmaninkatu 9-11, Helsinki 17.
Sale: The Academic Bookstore, P.Box 10 128, Helsingfors 10 I Helsinki 10. The Decline and Fall of the N eoplatonic
Interpretation of Plato
Die Serie ist seit dem Jahre 1923 erschienen, nachdem sie zuvor ein Teil An Outline and Some Observations
der Serie OFVERSIGT AF FINSKA VETENSKAPS-SOCIETETENS FORHANDLINGAR
1839-1923 gewesen ist. Erscheint in zwangloser Folge. E. N. Tigerstedt
Beitrage (in einer Kongressprache) werden von einem Mitglied der Gesell
schaft zum Druck vorgelegt.
Redaktor: Prof. D.r Henrik Zilliacus, Parkgatan 9, Helsingfors 14.
Austausch: Societas Scientiarum Fennica, Snellmansgatan 9-11, Helsingfors
17 I Snellmaninkatu 9-11, Helsinki 17.
Verkauf: Akademische Buchhandlung, Postfach 10 128, Helsingfors 10 I
Helsinki 10.
e
Societas Scientiarum Fennica
Helsinki-Helsingfors
Copyright © 1974 by
Societas Scientiarum Fennica
ISBN 951-653-037-0
CONTENTS
THE DECLINE AND FALL OF THE NEOPLATONIC INTERPRETATION OF PLATO
Schleiermacher and Esoteric Platonism 5
Medieval Platonism and N eoplatonism 7
Augustine and the New Academy 7
Medieval Platonism ......................................................... . 10
Medieval Academism ......................................................... . 12
John of Salisbury ........................................................... . 13
Renaissance Platonism ....................................................... . 14
Petrarch ................................................................... . 14
From Boccaccio to Bruni ............................... -..................... . 17
Marsilio Ficino 18
Pico della Mirandola . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
The Dionysian Problem........................................................ 21
Cusanus and the Areopagite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Ficino and Dionysius 24
Faber Stapulensis and Dionysius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
The Rising Doubts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
The Revival of the New Academy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Leonardo Bruni . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Melanchthon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Nizolio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
The Ramists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Montaigne 36
Gianfrancesco Pico ................................................... · · · · · · · · · 37
Petrus de Valentia ......................................................... . 38
Between Neoplatonism and the Academy 38
Serranus ........................................... · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 39
The third Alternative .......................................... · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 42
Rap in 43
Fleury 43
Andre Dacier ........................... · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 44
45
Gale .............................. ·· ·· · · · · · · · · · · · ··· ···· · · ·· · · ·· · · ·· ···· ·· · ·
The Cambridge Platonists 48
The Evils of Platonism 48
The Survival of the New Academy ........................................ · · · · 49
The Historians of Philosophy ................................. · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 49
Hom ....................................................................... . 50
51
Stanley ................................... ·. · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·
J. G. Vossius ........................................................... · · · · · 51
Leibniz 53
4 E. N. TIGERSTEDT» The Desline and Fall of the Neoplatonic Interpretation of Plato
Olearius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Mosheim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
57
~~:c~:~ler. . : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 61
The Encyclopedia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
Brucker in England ......................................................... . 62
The New Situation ......................................................... . 63
Tiedemann . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 SCHLEIERMACHER AND ESOTERIC PLATONISM
Tennemann ................................................................. . 64
Hegel ..................................................................... . 68
The modern 'Esoteric' interpretation of Plato ascribes to him a more
The Esoteric System ......................................................... . 69
NOTES ..................................................................... . 71 or less secret 'esoteric' doctrine, consisting of a metaphysical system not
INDEX NOMINUM ......................................................... . 107 to be found, at least not explicitly, in his written works, but propounded
orally to his disciples in the Academy and constituting the real though
hidden content of his philosophy.1 According to the modern Esoterists,
this interpretation of Plato was the ruling one, not only in classical anti
quity but for a long time afterwards, until, at the beginning of the nine
teenth century, the evil genius of Schleiermacher succeeded in convincing
contemporary and later scholars of the non-existence of an esoteric Plato
nism and in persuading them to confine their interpretation of Plato to
the Dialogues alone, thereby subjecting Platonism to a distortion from
which only the Esoterists of modern times have liberated it.z
As I have shown in another study,3 the modern Esoteric interpreta
tion of Plato cannot be found in any ancient Platonist, least of all in the
Neoplatonists, to whom Plato's entire philosophy was an esoteric doc
trine, revealed to the initiated, not in any oral tradition but in the Master's
written works, if read according to the rules of Neoplatonic exegesis.
Nor is the role the modern Esoterists assign to Schleiermacher more
in accordance with the facts. Before him, so they assert, everybody be
lieved in an esoteric Platonism. >>Es war allein die Autoritat Schleier
machers, welche diese wohl fundierte Auffassung binnen kurzem fast
vollig zum Erliegen brachte. Es ist heute merkwiirdig zu sehen, wie er
durch die Entdeckung der Dialogform dazu gefiihrt, den Unterschied
zwischen Schrift und Wort zu vermischen - mit zehn Seiten in der Ein
leitung seiner Platoniibersetzung es vermocht hat, die Meinung der Sach
verstandigen fiir mehr als ein Jahrhundert zu bestimmen.>>4
Verily, an astonishing phenomenon - this overthrow of a tradition
more than two thousand years old, caused by >>ten pages>> in a German
translation of Plato, due to a young and not very authoritative man,
for in 1804, when the Introduction appeared, Schleiermacher was a high
ly controversial figure in German theology, philosophy, and letters. A
miracle - if true.
It must, however, in all fairness be added that this account of Schleier
machcr's revolutionary role in Platonic scholarship is only a tendentious
6 E. N. TIGERSTEDT, The Decline and Fall of the Neoplatonic Interpretation of Plato CoMMENTATIONES HUMANARUM LITTERARUM 52 7
exaggeration of a current opinion, voiced by many scholars who by no of whose sketchy and fragmentary character the present writer is only
means share the Esoteric view of Plato. Thus, for instance, no less a man too well aware. Nonetheless, he hopes that the iollowing remarks will be
than Wilamowitz declared in his monograph on Plato that Schleiermacher of some use to future investigators.
was the man who discovered >>the real Platm> and thereby put an end
to the Neoplatonic Plato.5 This view is still the ruling one, expressed in
learned papers6 and works of reference.7 Actually, it goes back to Schleier MEDIEVAL PLATONISM AND NEOPLATONISM
macher's own contemporaries8 and the next generation of scholars, 9 who,
strongly impressed by his undeniably great and decisive contribution to It is a commonplace that medieval Platonism,l5 whether in the East
the study of Plato, tended to isolate him too much from his predecessors. or in the West, was actually Neoplatonism.16 This, however, has been
Neither his many old and new admirers nor his recent detractors have strongly denied by one of the foremost authorities on this subject, Ray
viewed his Platonic studies in a truly historical perspective.10 mond KlibanskyP Without going into details, it may be said that it de
If we today read those famous ten pages of the Introduction11 which, pends on what we mean by 'Neoplatonism'. If we use this term strictiori
according to a modern Esoterist, revolutionized our conception of Plato, sensu, as meaning that form of Platonism which starts with Plotinus,
we will find them disappointingly anodyne. They are evidently not written then, indeed, we must concede to Klibansky that a good deal of medieval
by a man who believes that he is the first to attack a deep-rooted pre Platonism contains elements belonging to different and earlier phases of
judice but rather by one who feels that he has many sympathizers, as Platonism. But if by 'Neoplatonism' we refer to the transformation of
was indeed the case. The N eoplatonists are mentioned only casually and Platonism into a metaphysical or theological system, occurring in the
in a way which shows that Schleiermacher had not found it worth while last century B.C. and the two first centuries A.D. - whether ultimately
to study them closely. For, speaking of the conception of an esoteric Plato originated by Plato himself or only by his immediate successors in the
nism as opposed to an exoteric, he says that of all the defen~ers of such Old Academy may in the present context be allowed to remain an open
a view >>die so-genannten N euplatoniker» are >>noch immer am meisten question18 - then the term, though susceptible to misunderstanding, is
zu loben», for they were the only ones who really attempted to systematize not so wrong as it may seem. For the investigations of the last decades
Plato.12 That this systematization was in fact based on the Dialogues have more and more tended to abolish the demarcation between 'middle
seems not to have been clear to Schleiermacher. A careful reader has no Platonism' and 'Neoplatonism', which both are now considered parts of
difficulty in discerning that the real target of Schleiermacher's polemics one and the same great philosophic and religious movement, culminating
was not the ancient Neoplatonists but some modern scholars, in the first in but not limited to Plotinus and his disciples.19
place certainly W. G. Tennemann, whose comprehensive work on Plato Much as they might have differed, the participators in this movement
had then recently appeared (1792-95).13 all considered Platonism a comprehensive metaphysical and theological
system. What this Platonism entirely lacked was the Socratic, aporetic
What had happened was something quite different from the current
element in Plato for which these philosophers and theologians had no use.20
legend. Schleiermacher had no need to combat the Neoplatonic interpre
The New Academy seemed to have disappeared without leaving a trace.21
tation of Plato for the excellent reason that, since at least half a century,
it had been rejected by most leading scholars. Metaphorically speaking:
Schleiermacher could not attack the old Neoplatonic fortress, for, when
he appeared upon the scene, it was already in ruins. What he did was to AUGUSTINE AND THE NEW ACADEMY
build a more modest house of his own, which many even today prefer
There is, however, an interesting and important exception. In A.D.
to the new-built castle of the Esoterists.
386, an ex-professor of Rhetoric, who had just been converted to Chris·
At the beginning of the nineteenth century, the decline and fall of
tianity and retired from his chair, Aurelius Augustinus, whom posterity
the Neoplatonic interpretation of Plato was an accomplished fact. This
was to revere as St. Augustine, wrote a book Contra Academicos. 22 The
event had a long and complicated history, being itself only one aspect
source was, of course, Cicero's Academica, which Augustine used in its
of the history of Platonism - a subject too vast to be mastered by any
second revised edition, of which now only the first quarter and a few
mortal man, even if confined to the West.14 But even of the still more
restricted topic indicated in the title, this paper can offer only an outline, fragments of the remainder are extant.23 But in contrast to Cicero, the
8 E. N. TIGERSTEDT, The Decline and Fall of the Neoplatonic Interpretation of Plato CoMMENTATIONES Hu111ANARUM LITTERARUM 52
9
future Father of the Church vehemently attacked the New Academy and the clouds of error having been removed, shone forth especially in Ploti
its scepticism. nus. This Platonic philosopher is regarded as being so like Plato, that
Augustine's personal experience of Academic scepticism and his argu one would think that they had lived at the same time. The interval of
mentation against it do not concern us here. What interests us is the way time between them is, however, so great that one should rather think that
in which Augustine tries to solve the difficult problem of reconciling Plato's Plato had come to life again in Plotinus>>.33
idealism with the scepticism of Cicero and the New Academy. He does Mter this eloquent survey of the history of Platonism, the reader is
so by tentatively attributing a secret doctrine to the latter. rather taken aback, when confronted with a new reservation:
After having hinted at such a doctrine,24 Augustine devotes the last >>This theory about the Academics I have sometime, as far as I could,
section of the Third and final Book to an attempt to prove its existence. thought probable. If it is false, I do not mind. It is enough for me that
He finds it impossible that such men as the Academic philosophers and I no longer think that truth cannot be found by man. But if anyone thinks
even more >>Marcus Tullius>> should not have realized the fatal consequence that the Academics were really of this opinion let him hear Cicero himself.
of their denial of Man's capability of ever reaching Truth.25 Nor was this He assures us that the Academics had a practice of hiding their view,
26
the case. >>Indeed they did it - for they were clever and careful.» >>Why and of not revealing it to anyone except to those who lived with them
then, did such great men engage in perpetual and stubborn wranglings in up to old age. What that doctrine was, God knows! For my part, I do be
order that no one might seem to possess the knowledge of Truth 1 Listen lieve that it was Plato's.>>34
now a little more carefully, not to what I know, but to what I think>>, Augustine tries hard to persuade himself, without quite succeeding,35
Augustine says diffidently.27 that the New Academy had a secret doctrine, consisting of Plato's true
After his master Socrates' death, Plato learned many things from the philosophy, conceived as a metaphysical system. Whether due to Cicero,
Pythagoreans whose master Pythagoras had been listening to the teaching as Augustine very uneasily and ambiguously suggests36 or not, this opinion
of Pherecydes of Syros and to the wisdom of many other sages.28 Combining cannot in any case be an invention of Augustine's, as some scholars be
Socrates with Pythagoras, Plato put together a complete system of philo lieve,37 because it can be found in earlier writers such as Numenius and
sophy, whose main characteristic was the dualism between the intelli Sextus Empiricus.38 This is not to deny that the theory about the secret
gible world, where truth itself resides, and this sensible world, which doctrine of the New Academy, Cicero included, was of personal importance
engenders only opinion.29 >>These and other similar things, I believe, were to Augustine: he could simply not conceive that so many outstanding
preserved, as far as possible, by his successors and guarded as 'mysteries'. men deliberately preferred doubt to certitude.39
For neither are such things easily understood save only by those who, That even Cicero becomes an adept of this secret doctrine is undoubted
purifying themselves from every vice, are living a life at a level higher than ly a stiff proposition, but not quite so silly as, on the face of it, it seems.
40
is human; nor could he be without grave fault who, knowing them, would For Cicero's conception of Plato is by no means homogenous. To him
wish to teach them to men of any kind whatever>>.30 Plato is not only the inquirer and doubter of the New Academy and the
Therefore, when Zeno, the founder of the Stoa, who had studied in Academica, but also the lofty moralist and sublime metaphysician of the
the Academy, began to propound a philosophy of his own, his former Phaedo and the Phaedrus, such as he appears in the First Book of the
fellow Academic, Arcesilas, who now was the leader of the Academy, Tusculan Disputations.41 The fervour with which Cicero there speaks of
>>acted in a most prudent and useful way, since the evil was spreading Plato with whom he even prefers to go astray rather than hold true views
widely, in concealing completely the doctrine of the Academy and burying with his opponents,42 clashes strongly with the way in which Plato is
it as gold to be found at some time by posterity.>>31 mentioned in the Academica Posteriora (I 12, 46). Nor should we forget
Arcesilas' secret policy was carried on by Carneades, and the conflict the heavy influence that Plato as a political theorist exerted on the author
between Stoics and Academics continued unto the time of Cicero. When of the De Re Publica and the De Legibus.43 It is only too easy to under
Antiochus, >>that Platonic Strawmam, who was at heart a Stoic, tried to stand why Augustine, forever searching for certitude, eagerly embraced
desecrate the shrine of Plato (Platonis adyta), Philo and after his death the theory that his beloved Marcus Tullius, too, was at heart a believer.44
Cicero had recourse again to the former weapons of doubt and negation.32 This means that Augustine deliberately shuts his eyes to the sceptical
>>Not long after this, then, all obstinacy and pertinacity had died down, aspects of Cicero's Platonism and Cicero's Plato. Not for a moment does
and Plato's doctrine, which in philosophy is the purest and most clear, he attribute any scepticism to Plato himself, as Cicero undoubtedly did.
10 E. N. TIGERSTEDT, The Decline and Fall of the Neoplatonic Interpretation of Plato C011Ili1ENTATIONES HUliiANARUl\I LI=ERARU!U 52 11
To Augustine, Plato is the systematic metaphysician of the Neoplatonists, This was the more important as the direct knowledge of Plato's works
the Master of Plotinus, himself >>another Plato>>, as more than a thousand remain very limited down to the beginning of the fifteenth century, when
years later an admirer of Plato, Plotinus, and St. Augustine, Marsilio the Greek Plato at last became known in the West. As early as in 387,
45
Ficino, was to call Plotinus. St. Jerome had with his customary rhetorical exaggeration complained
Therefore, to Augustine, Platonism is identical with Neoplatonism, that nowadays only >>some idle old men know the works or even the name
and the >>libri Platonicorum)>, so much discussed by scholars, which he of Plato>>.56 For centuries, Calcidius' partial translation of the Timaeus
often mentions apropos of his conversion, are Neoplatonic writings - ·was the only Platonic text extant in the West, and as late as ca. 1140
46
which ones is a matter that does not concern us here. Of Plato himself, Peter Abailard could declare: >>Platonis scripta in hac arte (dialectics)
it seems that, at least when writing the Contra Academicos, Augustine nondum cognovit latinitas nostra)>.57
had read only the Timaeus in Cicero's translation - not in that by Cal Some years later, ca. 1156, Henricus Aristippus, archdeacon of Catania
cidius47 - for his scanty knowledge of Greek did not then allow him to and one of the foremost councellors of King William I of Sicily, translated
study Plato in the original, and it is more than doubtful, whether he ever into Latin the Meno and the Phaedo.58 These clumsy, literal translations
attempted to do so.4s were, however, not much read, as the small number of extant MSS testi
But whatever Augustine may have read of Plato, he read it through fies, most of which, moreover, belong to the Renaissance period.59 Nor
Neoplatonic and Christian spectacles. To him, Platonism is a philosophy is there any sign that the possible study of the two Dialogues altered
which, up to certain limit, can be considered >>a preparation for the Gos current opinions about Plato and Platonism, though both of them contain
pel».49 But it is a preparation necessarily restricted to the initiated few, remarkable expressions of the aporetic aspect of Platonism.60 Despite the
whereas Christianity addresses each and all and can alone authoritatively labours of Aristippus, medieval Platonism remained faithful to the Nco
give us the whole truth.5° platonic interpretation of late antiquity and, except for the partial study
of the Timaeus,61 an indirect Platonism, not seriously disturbed by occa
sional, rare quotations from the Meno or the Phaedo.62
MEDIEVAL PLATONISM If we want to form an opinion of what an educated man in the middle
of the thirteenth century knew about Plato,63 we may consult the vast
In all these respects - the limited or missing direct contact with Plato, Speculum Historiale, of Vincent de Beauvais (t ca. 1264) and his Domini
the dependence on the Middleplatonic and Neoplatonic tradition, the de can eollaborators.64
liberate Christian reinterpretation - Augustine inaugurates and decisive No less than seven - admittedly very short - chapters of the Fourth
ly determines many centuries of medieval Platonism. Book are devoted to Plato.ss The first two (LXX, LXXIIII) deal with
Nor was his influence lessened by the study of Calcidius' commentary Plato's life, the following chapters with his opinions about God and the
on Timaeus 17 A- 53 C, for this Christian commentator (ca. A.D. 400) immortality of the soul (LXXV -LXXVIII), the last chapter (LXXIX)
was himself entirely dependent upon Middleplatonic as well as Neoplato contains some Platonic )>dicta)>. The whole is a loose and superficial com
nic interpretations of Plato,51 as was also the case of Macrobius' con pilation from conscientiously indicated sources - all of them Latin. Though
52
temporary commentary on Cicero's Somnium Scipionis - the two main knowledge of Greek was by then spreading in the vVest and Greek texts
pillars of medieval Platonism. The N eoplatonic element in medieval Pla were busily being translated directly into Latin - the leading trans
tonism was later on immensely strengthened by the discovery of the pseudo lator of the thirteenth century being the Dominican William of Moer
Dionysian writings in the West in Carolingian times, which gave access beke - there is no evidence that the brethren of his order in Beauvais
to Neoplatonism as brought to its systematic culmination by Proclus, knew Greek.66 Everything they have to say about Plato is taken at second
though, indeed, christened by 'Dionysius' (ca. A.D. 500?).53 Several cen hand, except, perhaps, for the Timaeus.67 Incidentally, nothing points to
turies later, ca. 1280, the Latin translation of Proclus' commentary on the a study of the Aristippean translations - a circumstance that testifies
first hypothesis of the Parmenides brought medieval philosophers into to their limited circulation.
direct contact with Plato himself. The Neoplatonic influence was rein The perhaps most curious passage is taken from >>Helinanclus>>, i.e.,
forced by many other translations of Greek texts, directly or from the the vast Chronicle of Helinand, a Cistercian monk in the cloister Froid
Arabic. 55 mont (t after 121.3), much used by Vincent.68 \Ve read there that it was
12 E. N. TIGERSTEDT, The Decline and Fall of the Neoplatonic Interpretation of Plato CoMMENTATIONES HuMANARUM LrTTERARUM 52 13
Plato's custom to give his books the names of his masters or of those who wiser. In Chapters VI-IX of the Fifth Book, we are told about Plato's
had taught the latter, in order to give his words and arguments greater death and his successors Apuleius and Hermes Trismegistus (!), where
authority. >>Hence his books are called Thimaeus, Phedron (!), Gorgias, upon follow two chapters on Plotinus and one on Hermes. In the Sixth
69
Protagoras.>> Book, however, we are given a chapter (XXIII) on >>the philosopher Arthe
What little is said about Plato's philosophy is, of course, wholly in silas (!)and the error of the New Academics>>, with quotations from Seneca's
conformity with current interpretation. The two aspects of Platonism De Beneficiis and Augustine's De Civitate Dei - not the Contra Academi
which interests Vincent is the doctrine of God and of the immorality of cos. In a later chapter (XXVII), we are told some anecdotes about Car
the soul, apropos of which Tertullian, Seneca, Macrobius, and Augustine neades, however, without any indication that he belonged to the Aca
are quoted. Vincent's Plato is the Plato of St. Augustine - seen from afar demy. The whole makes the impression of disarranged excerpts.
and >>as through a glass, darkly>>.
John of Salisbury
MEDIEVAL 'ACADEMISM' The one medieval author who expresses a personal interest in and
sympathy with the New Academy is, as has often been pointed out, John
Yet, this is not the whole truth about Platonism in the Middle Ages. of Salisbury (1115/20- 1180).74 But his 'Academism' is of a rather super
For there was always extant a different interpretation of Plato, viz., that ficial character, and his knowledge of the New Academy is very limited.
which is represented by Cicero in the Academica and some other works. John's main statements about his 'Academism' occurs in the Seventh
To ascertain the possible influence of this interpretation is, however, a Book of the Policraticus. There, in the very Prologue, he declares himself
most difficult task, which is not made easier by the absence of any com a follower of the Academics, for the reason indicated in the heading of
prehensive treatment of >>Cicero in the Middle Ages>> - a topic whose chapter I: >>The Disciples of the Academy More Discreet than Other Philo
vastness seems to have scared away scholars.70 Recently, an American sophers Who Blinded by Their Rashness Have Been Delivered up to a
scholar pointed out that >>for Cicero we lack even the beginnings of a bib Reprobate Sense>>. Surveying the ancient philosophers, he finds them great
liographical survey of extant manuscripts, printed editions, and commen men, indeed, but swollen with pride and inspired by an undue confidence
taries>>. He adds: >>Until this sort of fundamental work is done, it is almost in the strength of their reason and the freedom of their will. >>The conse
hopeless to attempt to trace the influence of a work such as the Acade quence was that they who had become fully acquainted with almost every
mica over a number of centuries.>>71 thing were in fatal error with regard to the greatest matters, and in the
Nevertheless, the same scholar has given a useful short survey of the confusion of their various opinions they became ignorant of even the
75
fortunes of the Academica during the Middle Ages, rightly stressing that, least.>> In contrast to these arrogant philosophers are the modest Aca
though it was far Jess known and read than other Ciceronian works, yet demics who »not at all deny their own shortcomings, but taking their
it seems always to have found readers and copyists. 72 The best known stand upon the platform of lack of knowledge are sceptics with regard
section of the Academica was the second half of the Academica Priora, to almost every point.>>76
the Lucullus - or Hortensius, as it was often wrongly called - extant This does not, however, mean that John of Salisbury embraced the
in three or four old, Carolingian or post-Carolingian MSS - whereas the position of The Academics without reservation. For Chapter II is en
Academica Posteriora, i.e., the extant first quarter, was much less known titled >>On the Error of the Academics>>, and there he resolutely rejects
- there is only one old MS, from the twelfth century.73 Nor should we all radical doubt and adduces against their >>ineptitude>> the great father
forget the far more numerous readers of Augustine's Contra Academicos and loyal teacher of the Church, Augustine, though even he quite often
who, thanks to this work, acquired at least a second-hand knowledge >>employs Academic moderation in his works.>>77
of Ciceronian Academism - together with a disbelief in its seriousness. Thus, John of Salisbury's 'Academism' reveals itself as simply a sturdy
Plato himself is, of course, in no way connected with Academic scepti common-sense, which refuses to indulge in unprofitable speculations.78 It
cism. is very sensible and not very philosophic. Nor has John any deeper know
All this did not amount to any satisfactory knowledge of the New Aca ledge of the philosophic doctrine he professes. Though he mentions Cicero's
demy, and if we consult the Speculum Historiale, we shall not be much Academica, he seems not to have read them himself;79 he probably knew
14 E. N. TIGERSTEDT, The Decline and Fall of the Neoplatonic Interpretation of Plato CoMMENTATIONES HuMANARUM Lr=ERARUM 52 15
of them from Augustine's Contra Academicos. 80 Of the historical Academy Aristotle. In the secular dispute about their respective merits, Petrarch
John entertains very confused notions. In the long rambling poem in bad decisively sides with Plato.
elegiac verses, called Entheticus81 - the sense of the name is uncertain What has been called Petrarch's Platonism, however, turns out to be
- dealing with >>the doctrines of the philosophers>>, there are some verses a problematic and controversial matter. 91 The locus classicus occurs in a
(726-734) on >>the doctrine of the Academics whose leader Arcesilas was>>, work from Petrarch's old age, De sui ipsius et multorum ignorantia (1367). 92
which are an attack on Academic scepticism. 82 The attack is repeated The main scope of this work - the attack on contemporary Averroistic
subsequently (ll37-l138) and followed by verses (l139-ll64) on Anti Aristotelianism - cannot be discussed here. 93 In this context, Petrarch
sthenes, the Academic, >>who was wiser because he asserted that only God extols Plato, >>the prince of philosophy>>, whom wise men, from Cicero and
knows everything, Man merely >>paucula>>. 83 On the contrary, though criti Virgil to Ambrose and Augustine, have preferred to Aristotle. 94 If Aris
84
cized, Plato is extolled as >>symmystes veri>> (936-IIOO). It is naturally totle is praised by the great mass of common people, Plato is praised by
the N eoplatonic Plato whom John praises. Here, too, are no traces of princes and nobles, though both, indeed, deserve to be praised by all
any direct knowledge of Plato, except for the Calcidean Timaeus.85 men. 95 But, as Augustine rightly says, Plato comes far nearer to Chris
Undoubtedly, an exhaustive investigation of later medieval philosophy tian truth than Aristotle. 96 Nor is Aristotle's criticism of Plato above sus
would discover further traces of an interest in Academic scepticism, thanks picion of envy and dishonesty. 97
to a study of Augustine's Contra Academicos or even of Cicero's Acade After having in this way voiced his admiration of Plato, Petrarch turns
mica. 86 But it seems apriori improbable that this interest ever led to a on his adversaries and accuses them of ignorance about Plato and his
reinterpretation of Platonism as such. Until evidence to the contrary is works. Petrarch knows better, though, as he modestly says, he is »not
forthcoming, we can hardly doubt that Augustine's silent separation of versed in letters and has no Greek>>. >>Nevertheless, I have sixteen or more
Plato from the New Academy was unconditionally accepted. The Neo of Plato's books at home, of which I do not know whether they have ever
platonic interpretation continued to reign supreme. heard of the names>>. If they do not believe Petrarch, they can come and
see. They will then see »not only several Greek writings of his but also
some which are translated into Latin, all of which they have never seen
RENAISSANCE PLATONISM elsewhere>>. And the books of Plato in Petrarch's possession are only a
small position of his works which Petrarch once saw in the hands of the
Nor could it be questioned as long as the direct knowledge of Plato's learned Greek Barlaam, who, alas, died before having taught Petrarch
work was so rare and so limited. And so it remained until the dawn of Greek.98
the Italian Renaissance. On this point, too, the old conception of the This statement is of the greatest interest and signifies a new epoch
87
radically renovating character of the Renaissance proves to be true. in European Platonism. For the first time, we hear of a Greek manuscript
And it is only appropriate that the first writer who expresses a new atti of Plato in the West, though at least Henricus Aristippus must have had
tude to Plato should be Francesco Petrarca. 88 Recent investigations have one at his disposal. Petrarch's MS was long believed to have been lost
confirmed and strengthened the traditional notion of his decisive role in but has recently with great probability been identified as the most famous
the discovery and appreciation of classical literature. 89 of all MSS of Plato. 99 The latin translations of which Petrarch speaks
are still extant, at least two of them, Calcidius' Timaeus and Henricus
Aristippus' PhaedoJOO
Petrarch What, then, did Petrarch know of Plato's writings1 The Greek texts
we can leave out of the account, even if Petrarch might have read some
Petrarch's humanism is, of course, mainly a Latin humanism. Yet, Dialogues with Barlaam.10l The Timaeus was generally known and widely
the Greeks are never absent from his thoughts; he is always interested studied in the Middle Ages. There remain the Meno and Phaedo translated
in them, forever comparing them with the Romans and patriotically wor by Henricus Aristippus. The latter work Petrarch had demonstrably read,
rying about their pretension to superiority. 90 In philosophy, indeed, the as the extant marginal annotations - of slight importance - testify, as
situation is different, for there, despite Cicero, Seneca, Apuleius, Macro do also references to the Phaedo - or Phaedro, as Petrarch writes - in
bins, Boethius, the greatest names are those of two Greeks, Plato and his works.1o2
E. N. TIGERSTEDT, The Decline and Fall of the Neoplatonic Interpretation of Plato CoMlii"ENTATIONES HuMANARUM LITTERARUM 52 17
16
But this direct contact with Plato did not make any real impression it indignantly. >>The Academy is disapproved and rebutted long since, and
upon Petrarch or influence his conception of Platonism. As Eugenio Garin it is established that something can be known when God reveals it>>, he
has pertinently said, >>the appeal to the reading of Plato was primarily exclaims in the De sui ipsius et multorum ignorantia.115 At the very end
polemical». If we turn from the enthusiastic praise of Plato in the De of his life, he even goes as far as calling the Academica >>rather a subtle
sui ipsius et multorum ignorantia to the chapter on Plato in the Rerum than a necessary or useful work>>.116
memorandarum libri (ca. 1345), we shall be sorely disappointed, for it con It is therefore doubtlessly right to characterize Petrarch's attitude as
tains nothing that reveals any deeper knowledge of Plato.104 No doubt, >>more of a cautiousness than a full-blown scepticism>>.117 It is an attitude
we must make some allowance for the fact that the latter work was written which resembles that of John of Salisbury, well-known to Petrarch.us
at a comparatively early date, while Petrarch's study of Plato seems, at And, like J olm, Petrarch never sees Plato himself as an 'Academic'. To
least partially, to belong to his later years.105 But there is no sign that him, as already to Augustine, Plato is in no way identified with the Aca
Petrarch ever changed his mind. His conception of Plato and Platonism demy.
is derived from Latin sources, Cicero, Apuleius' De Platone et eius dogmate,
Augustine,l06 which means that it is medieval, Neoplatonic.107 The fact
that Petrarch preferred Plato to Aristotle meant nothing new, for there From Boccacio to Bruni
108
had always been philosophers and theologians who did the same. It
seems that we have to accept Garin's conclusion that Petrarch's Plato Giovanni Boccaccio had the opportunity to admire Petrarch's Greek
nism was no more than a pious wish, fulfilled only in the Quattrocento.l09 Plato,119 and he may have read the Latin Phaedo.120 But when, at the end
And yet, as Garin has not failed to stress, Petrarch's attitude to Plato of his life, he wrote about Plato in his commentary on the Divina Comme
points forward, in so far as it demands a recourse to the original text, dia,121 he did not reveal any direct knowledge of Plato, save, of course,
to the Greek Plato. Here, too, the common matchword of the Humanists, the Timaeus. Like Petrarch, he never learnt Greek, interested though he
ad fontes, holds true, even if Petrarch was compelled to leave the reali was in Greek language and literature.122
The same holds true of his and Petrarch's foremost disciple, the great
zation of this programme to later generations.
Cicero being one of the principal sources of Petrarch's Platonism, we Chancellor of the Florentine republic, Coluccio Salutati.123 The appearance
may finally ask to what extent the Ciceronian Academism influenced Pet of a new spirit reveals itself, however, in his eager attempts to acquire
rarch, who knew, studied, and quoted the Academica,110 possibly also the a copy of the Latin Phaedo, which he at last obtained.124 But his great
Contra Academicos of St. Augustine,m whose authority to Petrarch over- contribution to Greek and Platonic studies in Italy was the invitation
of Manuel Chrysoloras to Florence, of which he was the main promoter.
shadows even that of Cicero.
We find, sure enough, that Petrarch declares that >>the modest way Shortly afterwards, Chrysoloras together with Uberto Decembrio produced
of the Academy>> appeals to him: >>to follow probability where we cannot a Latin translation of the Republic (1400-03) which the old Chancellor
attain more, never to condemn anything rashly, never to assert anything might have read.l25 Though far from successful, this translation initiated
impudently>>.112 With mock-modesty he says that he is not an asserter of the great series of Plato-translations, culminating in that by Marsilio
truth (diffinitor) but a searcher for it (vestigator). For to assert behoves Ficino (1484), which made Plato accessible to all educated men. It is a
a sage, whereas Petrarch is >meither a sage nor near to wisdom>>, but, as tale, told often and well, not to be retold here.126
Cicero says, >>a great opinion-holder>> (magnus opinator).U3 In a letter from This direct contact with the whole Corpus Platonicum led to a radical
his later years, he repeats this statement. He has found truth difficult change in Western Platonism - but only in the long run. Even if we
to discover and lost confidence in himself, so that he has become >>a prose reject the opinion, hold by some scholars, that Italian Renaissance Plato
lyte of the Academy as one of the big crowd, as the very last of this humble nism originated in the Byzantine East,m the undeniable Byzantine in
flock>>. Now he doubts >>every single thing, with the single exception of fluence on Platonic studies in Italy tended to strengthen the traditional
Xeoplatonic interpretation.
what I believe is a sacrilege to doubt>>.114
The last words indicate the limits of Petrarch's 'Academism'. If he . True, there are from the very beginning some new accents. A letter
is a sceptic, he is a Christian sceptic, to whom there are beliefs too sacred hke that by Leonardo Bruni, the foremost of the early fourteenth cen
for doubt. ·when he is confronted with a radical scepticism, he rejects tury translators of Plato, to the Florentine humanist, Niccolo Niccoli,l28
2
18 E. N. TIGERSTEDT, The Decline and Fall of the Neoplatonic Interpretation of Plato CoMMENTATIONES HuMANARUM LI=ERARUM 52 19
with its enthusiastic appreciation of Plato's literary art, so typical of the In this way, Ficino composed a vast Corpus of writings which in his eyes
age, could hardly have been written in contemporary Byzance, as little were only a little less holy and revealed than the Scriptures.I3S
29
as Bruni's still more enthusiastic exaltation of poetic madness,l as de For to Ficino, Plato was only one link - though the most important
scribed in the Phaedrus, translated by Bruni in 1424.13° _ in the great chain of pagan theologians and philosophers who - paral
Nevertheless, the Neoplatonic interpretation continued to hold its sway. lelling the Hebrews and inspired by them - announced Christ and paved
The Plato so eagerly defended in the long battle between Platonists and the way for Christianity: Zoroaster, Mercurius Trismegistus, Orpheus,
Aristotelians, culminating in the middle of the Quattrocento, when Aglaophamus, Pythagoras, Philolaus, and Plato, who in his turn gave
the protagonists were three Greeks - Gemistns Pletho, Bessarion, and birth to later thinkers, down to Gemistus Pletho, Bessarion, and Nicolaus
Georgius Trapezuntius131 - was the Plato of the Neoplatonists. To the Cusanus.139 It is the philosophia pia, whose inheritor and representative
greatest of Plato's defenders, Cardinal Bessarion, Plotinus, Porphyry, Ficino believed himself to be.
Proclus, Iamblichus, Simplicius, Damascius were >>the most learned men Obviously, such a view of the history of philosophy implies not only
2
of the Platonic school».13 a 'platonizing' of Christianity and a 'neoplatonizing' of Platonism but as
well, and even more, a 'christianizing' of both Platonism and Neoplato
nism. Whether we call this way of combining and mingling Christian and
M arsilio Ficino non-Christian ideas a synthesis or a syncretism must remain a matter of
personal judgement. In this context, the crucial point is that Ficino lent
The foremost of all Italian Renaissance Platonists was, of course, his enormous authority to supporting the Neoplatonic interpretation of
Marsilio Ficino,133 though he was more than a 'Platonist', if by this word Plato - though, it must be admitted, an interpretation which was in
we mean a mere student and disciple of Plato's. His importance to Euro its turn heavily permeated by Christian ideas - the interpretation of the
pean Platonism is not limited to his famous Latin translation, which en Timaeus is the exception that proves the rule. Ficino's Plato is at one
tirely superseded all earlier attempts and remained for centuries the Plato and the same time Neoplatonic and Christian, depending upon from which
of the Western world.134 For Ficino was a philosopher in his own right, angle you regard him.
though Plato plays, indeed, a foundamental and central part in his philo This means that to Ficino the interpretation of Plato constitutes no
sophy. Ficino intended to be and explicitly called himself a Platonist; the problem. He follows the Neoplatonists, as far as his Christian convictions
title of his chief philosophic work is Platonic Theology on the Immortality permit him to do so. In his Platonic Theology he distinguishes between
of the Souls; he regarded himself as a restorer of Platonism and was so six Academies: the ancient Athenian under Xenocrates, the Middle Aca
regarded by his contemporaries.135 demy under Arcesilas, the New Academy under Carneades, the Egyptian
But the Plato who thus, thanks to Ficino, had risen from the dead under Ammonius (Saccas), the Roman under Plotinus, and finally the
was the Neoplatonic Plato. After having published all the Platonic writ Lycian Academy under Proclus.I4o From this list Middle Platonism, as we
ings, the authentic as well as the spurious, in Latin, Ficino translated now call it, is conspicously absent, though Ficino well knew both Albinus
the Enneads (1492). In the >>Exhortation to those that listen to or read - whom he calls Alcinous - and Apuleius.141
Plotinus>>, he solemnly advises them that they should consider themselves The six Academies represent the continuity of the Platonic tradition.142
listening to Plato himself. For, through the mouth ofPlotinus, Plato speaks Yet, they are not in Ficino's eyes of equal authority. This appears clearly
to us - a second Plato, as elevated as the first, and sometimes even from the heading of Chapter IV of Book XVII of the Theologia Platonica
deeper.136 So high was Ficino's opinion of Plotinus' authority as an inter '~hich deals with the Platonic metempsychosis: >>That Plato should more
preter of Plato, that he even followed him in rejecting the interpretatio rightly be interpreted according to the first four Academies, especially
Christiana of the Timaeus.137 the first and the fourth>>.l43 From the fifth and sixth Academies - those
The translation of Plotinus was followed by others of works by Iam of Plotinus and Proclus - the first four differ by interpreting Plato's
blichus, Proclus, Porphyry, Synesius, Alcinous (i.e. Albinus) and other s~atemcnt about the metempsychosis as being merely poetical. But they
Platonists (1497), as well as by Commentaries on Plato (1496) and by a differ from each other in as much as the Academies of Arcesilas and Car
translation of Dionysius the Areopagite (1496). Early in life (1471), Ficino neades turn Plato into a probabilist or even a pure sceptic. For such a
had translated the Pimander, ascribed to Mercurius (Hermes) Trismegistus. conception of Plato Ficino has as little use as the Neoplatonists had.144
