Richter,
Neuplatonische
Studien (Halle, 1864 ff.
Windelband - History of Philosophy
III.
and IV.
1855) (cf.
R.
Volkmann, Lebcn, Schriflen und Philosophic des P.
, Berlin, 1872).
[Plutarch's Morals, trans, ed.
by Goodwin, 5 vols.
, Boston, 1870 ; also tr.
by Shilleto and by C.
W.
King, both in Bohn's lib.
, Lond.
1888 and 1882 resp.
] We mention further **•»■*!
tthi« of Tyre of the time of the Antonines ; his contemporary, Apuleius of Madaura, who belongs in this series not only on account of bis philosophical writings (ed.
by A.
Goldbacher, Vienna, 1876), but also on account of his allegorico-satincal romance, "The Golden Ass" (cf.
Hildebrand in the introduction to his col lected works, Leips.
1842) [The Works of Apuleius, Bohn's lib.
] ; the oppo nent of Christianity, Celaus, whose treatise dXr^t XA70* (about 180) is known only from the counter- treatise of Origen, na-rd KA<roi> (cf.
Th.
Keim, C.
" voahres
Wort," ZQrich, 1873); and lastly the physician Claudius Galen, who died about 200, and might, to be sure, with his broad eclecticism be likewise classed as a Peri patetic and also as a Stoic (cf. K. Sprengel, Beitrage zur (reach, d. Medicin, I. 117 ff. ). From the same circle of ideas arose also the writings circulated under the name of Hermes Trismegistus, which belong to the third century (French tr. by L. Menard, Paris, 1866 ; partially published by G. Parthey, Berlin, 1864).
Among the Platonists of the second century Nicomacbus of Gerasa in Ara bia, of whose writings arithmetical text-books and (through Photius) an extract from a work ' Apitf/irjTucd Btokoyoiiuro. are extant, and Numenius of Apamea, concerning whom we owe our instruction mainly to Eusebius, are strongly Neo- Pythagorean. Cf. F. Thedinga (Bonn, 1875).
The entrance of Greek philosophy into Jewish theology may be traced back to the middle of the second century b. c, where it can be recognised in the Biblical explanation of Aristobuloa ; it appears then in a particularly marked manner, and in a form that is already much nearer the Alexandrian sphere of thought, in the pseudo-Solomonic Book of Wisdom. Yet these are but weak forerunners of the important creation of Philo of Alexandria, of whose life little more is known than that in the year 39, when already in advanced age, he was a member of an embassy from his native community to the Emperor Calig
Chap. •-». ]
The Religion* Period. 217
ola. His numerous writings, among which there is also much that is not genuine, were edited by Th. Mangey (Lond. 1742), Leips. stereotype ed. , 8 vols. , 1861-53 ; [Eng. tr. by C. D. Yonge, 4 vols. , Lond. , Bohn's lib. ].
F. Dihne, Die jiidisch-alexandrinische Beligionsphilosophie (Halle, 1834).
A. Gfrorer, Philon und die alexandrinische Theosophie (Stuttgart, 1835); M. Wolff, Die philonischt Philosophic (Gothenburg, 1858); Ewald, Gesch. de$
Volkes Israel, VI. 231 ff.
Among the Christian Apologists whose writings are collected in the Corpus
Apoioyetarum Christianorvm secundi sceculi, ed. by Otto (Jena, 1842 ff. ), the most prominent is Flavius Justin Martyr of Sichem, who lived in the middle of the second century. Two defensive writings and a dialogue with Trypho the Jew axe preserved [Eng. tr. in Ante-Nicene Ch. lib. , ed. by Roberts and Donald son. Edinburg, T. 4 T. Clark, 1867 —]. K. Semisch (2 vols. , Breslau, 1840-42), and B. Aube (Paris, 18(31) treat of him. Further Apologists from the Hellenic circle of culture are Aristldes (whose discourses, discovered in the Armenian language, were printed with a Latin translation, Venice, 1878), Athenagoras of Athens (rpta-ptla s-tpl Xpia-Ttar&e addressed to Marcus Aurelius about 176), Theophilus of Ant inch (a treatise addressed to Autolycus about 180), Melito of . Sard is, Apollinaris of Hierapolis, and others. — Latin literature presents especially Minucius Felix, whose dialogue Oft an' us was written about 200 >d. in the Corpus scriptorum ecclesiasticorum latinorum, by C. Halm, Vienna, 1W7). The rhetorician, Firmianus Lactantius (about 300), is to be placed in the same series. His main treatise is the Institution's Divinoe [tr. of the above authors in Ante-Nicene lib. , see above].
Of the Gnostics our information comes essentially through their opponents, Iren»us (140-200 ; his treatise "EXryxot «al irarpowii ttjs yf>tvSuriiu>v yriiatut, ed. by A. Stieren, Leips. 1863), Hippolytus (Kurd racwr alpioiur f\ryx°*- *'''■ by I>uncker and Schneidewin, Gottingen, 1869), Tertullian (Adversus Valenti- nianos), etc. [Eng. tr. of the above writings in Ante-Nicene lib. , above]. Of Gnostic treatises only one, and that by an unknown author, is extant, VUara npU (ed. by Petermann, Berlin, 1861). Of the main representatives of this doctrine there were active in the first half of the second century Saturninus of Antioch, Basilides, a Syrian, and Carpocrates in Alexandria ; toward the ■riddle of the century VaJentinus. the most important of them (died about let)); and toward the end of the century Bardeaanea of Mesopotamia. — Expo sitions of the Onostif Systems by A. W. Neander (Berlin, 1818) [Eng. tr. by Tnrrey, Boston, 1866], E. Matter (Paris, 1843), Chr. Baur (Tubingen, 1836), A- Hilgenfeld (Jena, 1884), same author, Bardesancs, der letzte Gnostiker <Leips. 1864). — A. Harnack, Zur QucUenkritik der Geschichte des Gnosticismus (Leips. 1873); [H. L. Mansel, Gnostic Heresies, Lond. 1876].
The most radical opponent of Greek science was TaUan, an Assyrian, whose treatise npkt "EXXijrot arose about 170, but who later became himself an adherent of the Valentinian Gnosticism. The passionate Apologist Qu. Sep- timius Florens Tertullian (195-220, for a time Presbyter in Carthage) ended likewise in opposition to the Catholic Church, in the sect of the Montanists. Hi« works have been edited by Fr. Oehler (3 vols. , Leips. 1853 f. ), recently by A ReifJt-rscheid and Wlssowa (Vol. I. Vienna, 1890, in Corp. script, eccl. tat. ) [Eng tr. in Ante-Ntcene lib. ]. Cf. A. W. Neander, Antignostifus, Geist des
Tertullian, etc. (2d ed. Berlin, 1849) [Eng. tr. Bohn's lib. , 1851J; A. Hauck, 7V» Lef>en und Schriften, Erlangen, 1877). — In the same series, but from a later lime, is the African rhetorician Arnobius, whose seven books, Adversus
G'ntes. were composed about 300 (ed. by A. KeifTerscheid in Corp. script, ecel. 1st. . Vienna, 1876).
<*1 the writings of Clement of Alexandria (died about 217) three treatises are preserved, A470I wporprrTiitit vpii *EXXqra{ — IIai6a>u>>4« — £rpw/iarcit (ed. by J. Potter, Oxford, 1716) [tr. in Ante-Nicene lib. ]. From his school (cf. on the Alex. Catechetical school, Guericke, Halle, 1824 f , and Hasselbaoh, SteUin, 1636) went forth the founder nf Christian theology, Origan, surnamed the Ada- •matine. Born 18ft a. d. in Alexandria, equipped with the full education of the time, he came forward early as a teacher, fell into conflicts on account of his doctrines with the Synod, was by it removed from his nffice, and later lived in Cawarea and Tyre, dying in the latter place 2. 14. of his writings, aside from the above-mentioned treatise against Celsus, his work lUpl ipx&' is of chief importance ; It is extant almost only in the Latin version of Kufinus (ed. by
218 Hellenistic-Roman Thought : Religious Period. [Part II
Uedepenning, Leips. 1836) [tr. in Ante-Nicene lib. ]. Cf. J. Reinkens, De Clemente Presbytero Al. (Breslau, 1851); Redepenning, 0. , Darstellung seines Lebens und seiner Lehre (Bonn, 1841-46) [cf. Bigg, The Christian Platonitts
of Alexandria, Oxford, 1887 ; A. Harnack, Art. Origen in Ene. Brit. l.
A collection of the sources for all the Church writers of this period has been
issued by J. P. Migne, Patrologia; Cursus Computus (Paris, 1840 ff. ).
A certain Ammonius Saccus appears in old traditions as the founder of Neo-Flatonism, but nothing is known to justify this tradition. To his pupils belonged Plotinus, Origen, the rhetorician Iionginua (213-273), to whom the book llepl \nj/ovt was ascribed, and another Origen.
The true founder of the school was Plotinus (204-269). Born in Lycopolis in Egypt, and educated in Alexandria, he became a member of an expedition against the Persians in order to promote his religious studies, made a highly successful appearance as teacher in Rome about 244, and died on a country estate in Campania. His works, written late in life, were published by his disciple Porphyry, arranged in six enneads. Ed. by H. Mliller (Leips. 1878-80), with a German translation [Eng. tr. in part by Th. Taylor, Lond. 1787, 1704, 1817, French tr. by Bouillet, Paris, 1857-60]. Cf. H. Kirchner, Die Philos. des PI. (Halle, 1864). — A.
Richter, Neuplatonische Studien (Halle, 1864 ff. ). — H. v. Kleist, Neuplat. Studien (Heidelberg, 1883). — [A. Harnack, Art. JVeo- Platonism in Enc. Brit. }
To the Alexandrian Neo-Platonism are reckoned further Gentilianus Ame lias of Ameria, and the Tyrian Porphyry (about 230-300). Among the ex tant writings, aside from the biographies of Plotinus and Pythagoras, are to be mentioned ' KQopnal irpAt tA mi)T&, an aphoristic abridgment of the system of Plotinus (printed in Creuzer's ed. of the works of Plotinus, Paris, 1855), the treatise On Abstemiousness (irepl iwoxv* ru>i> ^vxw, important on account of its use of the xepl t6<ref3clas of Theophrastus ; cf. J. Bernays, Berlin, 1866), and of the commentaries the Eicrayuyij elt t4i Kariryoplat (ed. by Busse, Berlin, 1877 ; and also in the Berlin ed. of Aristotle, Vol. IV. ).
Syrian Neo-Platonism was founded by Jamblichus of Chalcis in Coale- Syria (died about 330), a hearer of Porphyry. His writings were principally commentaries upon Hellenistic and Oriental theology. The following are par tially preserved : llepl tov IlvBayopucoQ plov (ed. by Westermann, Paris, 1850), A6701 rporptTT wit tit <pi\o<ro<plav (ed. by Kiessling, Leips. 1813), Iltpl rijt monnji vn0TiiuiTiKrjf hrurri)iir\t (ed. by Villoison, Venice, 1781) [Eng. tr. Life of Pyth. by Taylor, Lond. 1818, Egyptian Mysteries, by same, Chiswick, 1821].
Of the disciples of the school, Dezippus commented on the Aristotelian Categories (ed. by L. Spengel, Munich, 1859), Sallustius wrote a compendium of metaphysics (ed. by Orelli, Zurich, 1821), and Themisthis (about 317-387) made himself known as a paraph rast and commentator upon Aristotelian works. From the same circle comes the treatise De Mysteriis AUgypliorum (ed. by G. Parthey, Berlin, 1867 ; cf. Harless, Munich, 1858).
This movement had a transient political success by the accession of the Emperor Julian, who hoped by its help to renew the old religion and displace Christianity. His writings against the Christians have been edited with a German translation by K. J. Neumann (Leips. 1880). . Cf. A. W. Neander,
Ueber den Kaiser J. und sein Zeitalter (Berlin, 1812). — D. Ft. Strauss, J. der Abtriinnige, der Romantiker aufdem Throne der Cdsaren (Mannheim, 1847). — A. Mttcke, J. nach den Quellen (Gotha, 1866-68).
The founder of Athenian Neo-Platonism was Plutarch of Athens (died after 4:30), with his pupils Syrianus and Hierocles. All these, as well as the following, composed commentaries upon Platonic and Aristotelian or Pythago rean writings, which are in part preserved. More important was Proems (411-485), among whose works the most important is llepl rrjs icard IlXdrwm $eo\oylat (ed. of his works by V. Cousin, Paris, 1820-25) [Eng. tr. by Th. Taylor]. Cf. H. Kirchner, De Prod. Metaphysica (Berlin, 1846). K. Stein- hart's Art. in Ersch und GrUber's Enc.
The last head of the Platonic Academy was Damascius, of whose writings the beginning of a treatise xtpl rur rpiiruv dpxur, and the conclusion of a com mentary upon the Parmenides are extant (ed. by J. Kopp, Frankfort a. M. 1826 ; cf. E. Heitz in /Strew*. Abhdl. fur Philos. , 1884), and also a biography of
Cha*. 2, $ 18. ] Authority and Revelation. 2l9
hi> teacher Isidores. Among the commentators of this time Simplicius is prominent (on the Physic*, ed. pr. Venice, 1520, the first four books, Diels, Berlin, 1882 ; on the De Caelo, Karsten, Utrecht, 1805 ; on the Dr. Anima, Hayduck, Berlin, 1882V
The two latter wandered with their immediate associates for a time toward Persia, when in the year 529 the Emperor Justinian closed the Academy, con fiscated its property, and by forbidding lectures on heathen philosophy gave the external confirmation to its close.
§ 18. Authority and Revelation.
The imperturbable self-certainty and self-mastery which the post- Aristotelian philosophy had sought and in part claimed for the wise man, had been so deeply shaken with the progress of time that it had given place to a feeling of the need of help, both in the ethical and in the theoretical spheres. The philosophising individual no longer had confidence that he could attain to right insight or to his soul's salvation by his own strength, and sought his help accord ingly, partly amid the great monuments of the past, partly in a divine revelation. Both tendencies, however, are ultimately upon the same basis, for the confidence which was placed in the men and writings of a previous time rested only upon the fact that they were regarded as especially favoured vessels of higher revelation. Authority, therefore, acquired its value as the mediate, historically accredited revelation, while the divine illumination of the individ ual as immediate revelation came to its assistance. Differently as the relation between these two forms was conceived of, it is yet the
common mark of all Alexandrian philosophy that it regards divine revelation as the highest source of knowledge. Already in this inno vation in the theory of knowledge, we find expressed the heightened value which this period put upon personality, and on personality as evincing itself in the feelings. The longing of this time desired that the truth might be found by experience, as an inner commun ion of man with the Supreme Being.
1. The appeal to authority often makes its appearance in Greek and Hellenistic philosophy in the sense of a confirmation and strengthening of an author's own views, but not as a decisive and conclusive argument. The jurare in verba magistri might be usual enough among the subordinate members of the schools,' but the heads of schools, and in general the men who engaged in indepen dent research, maintained an attitude toward the teachings of the former time that was much more one of criticism than of uncondi-
subjection ; ' and though in the schools, chiefly the Academic
>Though even the well-known atrr&i tpa [ipte dixit] of the Pythagoreans U " only through later writers (Cicero).
* Even the admiration of Socrates, in which all the following schools were at e, dkd nut in Itself lead to hi* being regarded as the valid authority for defi le philosophical doctrine*.
220 Hellenistic- Roman Thought : Religious Period. [Pabt 1L
and Peripatetic, the inclination to preserve and maintain the teaching of the founder as an unassailable treasure was fostered by the custom of commenting upon his works, yet in all the conflict as to the criteria of truth the principle had never been brought forward that something must be believed because this or that great man had said it.
How strongly the need for authority had come to be felt in the later time, we may recognise even from the countless interpolations which were the order of the day in the whole Alexandrian litera ture. Their authors, who, perhaps, for the most part acted in good faith, since they themselves regarded their thoughts as only devel opments and continuations of the old doctrines, evidently believed that they could get a hearing for their works in no better way than by assigning to them the name of one of the heroes of wisdom, of an Aristotle, a Plato, or a Pythagoras. This phenomenon appeared most extensively among the Neo- Pythagoreans, whose chief con cern it was to invest their new doctrine with the halo of ancient wisdom. But the more the convictions that were to be established in this manner bore a religious character, the more lively became the need to conceive of these authorities themselves as the bearers of a religious revelation, and therefore all the traits that might stamp them as such were sought for within them or even read into them. Not contented, however, with this, the later Greeks believed that they could give a higher sanction to their philosophy, as well as to their entire civilisation, by deriving it from the Oriental religions : thus Numenius* did not hesitate to maintain that Pythagoras and Plato had presented only the old wisdom of the Brahmans, Magi, Egyptians, and Jews. As a result of this, the extent of literary authorities increased extraordinarily; the later Neo-Platonists, a Jamblichus and Proclus, commented not only on Greek philosophers, but also upon the entire Hellenic and barbarian theology,2 and credulously adopted myths and miraculous tales from these sources.
In quite a similar manner Oriental literature testified also to its esteem for Hellenism. Among the predecessors of Philo, Aristo- bulus especially appealed to verses which were interpolated in Orpheus and Linus, in Homer and Hesiod ; and with Philo himself, the great Jewish theologian, the great men of Greek philosophy appear side by side with the Old Testament, as bearers of wisdom.
The felt need of authority naturally asserts itself most strongly in the unconditional faith in religious records. Here the Old Testa-
• In Eus. Proep. Ec. IX. 7. a Marinus, Prod. Vit. 22.
Chaf. 2, J 18. ] Authority and Revelation : Philo. 221
ment was from the beginning the firm foundation for the science and philosophy of Judaism and also for that of (orthodox) Christian ity. But in the Christian Church the need of establishing a collec tion of writings in which the system of faith should be defined with certainty, first developed with Marcion, and then was gradually satisfied in the completion and conclusion of the New Testament: with Irenseus and Tertullian both Testaments already appear with
the full value and validity of churchly authority.
2. If now in this way even scientific thought, which in conse
quence of sceptical disintegration no longer gave itself credit for the power of truth, subjected itself voluntarily to the authorities of antiquity and to religious institution, it was yet in nowise bound thereby to the extent that we might suppose. This relation rather took the form, along all lines, of extracting from the authoritative sources, and also of reading into them, the scientific doctrines which arose from the new religious movements. 1
Where in so doing they did not resort expressly to those inter polations which are found more or less in the entire literature of the period as well as in Neo-Pythagoreanism, they employed as their instrument the method of allegorical interpretation.
This meets us first in Jewish theology. It had its prototype indeed in the allegorical interpretation of myths, which made its appearance early in Grecian literature, was employed by the Sophists, and extensively prosecuted by the Stoics. It was applied to relig ious documents by Aristobulus, but it was Philo1 who carried it through methodically, proceeding from the conviction that a dis tinction must be made in Scripture between the literal and the spiritual meaning, between its body and its soul. In order to teach his commands to the great mass of men, who in their sensuous nature are unable to apprehend the divine purely, God gave to revelation the anthropomorphic form, behind which only the spirit ually mature man penetrates to the true sense. This sense is to be vmght in the philosophical conceptions which lie hidden in the historical husks. Accordingly, since Philo the task of theology has been directed toward interpreting religious documents into a sys tem of scientific doctrines ; and if he uses Greek philosophy for this
and finds in it the higher meaning of the Scripture, he
1 Kren a man like Plutarch of Cbssronea, who follow* the writing of Plato M be would the revelation* of a religious document, does not scruple to ii'tro- incr rata the teaching of his master Aristotelian and Stoic doctrines as well as ha'own religious view.
CL Siegfried, Philon e. Alexandria als Amleger de* alien Testament! ■Jena. 1876).
purpose,
222 Hellenistic-Roman Thought : Religious Period. [Part IL
explains this relation on the ground that the thinkers of Greece have drawn from Mosaic documents. 1
Following his example, the Gnostics then attempted to transform Oriental myths into Greek conceptions by allegorical interpretation, and thought thus to develop a secret doctrine of the Apostolic tradition, — the Apologists maintained the harmony of Christian doctrine with the dogmas of Greek philosophy, — even men like Irenaeus and Tertullian worked upon the New Testament, —and finally Origen knew how to bring the philosophy of Christianity into accord with its documents. The great Alexandrian theologian, like the Gnostics who first attempted to create a Christian theology, distinguished between the carnal (somatic), psychical, and spiritual
(pneumatic) conceptions of the religious records, — corresponding to the metaphysico-anthropological ideas of the time"(cf. § 19 f. ). For him the literal historical tradition yields only a Christianity according to the flesh " (xpurrumcr/iof <tw^oti»co«), and it is the task of theology to lead out of this, through the moral significance at which the " psychical " readers stop, to the ideal content of the Scripture, which must then illumine the reader as self-evident truth. Only he who grasps this last belongs to the pneumatic or spiritual readers, to whom the eternal gospel thus disclosed reveals itself.
This extraction of philosophical meaning from religious tradition is found in fullest extent among the Xeo-Platonists. Jamblichus practises in accordance with the Stoic model, on all forms of Oriental and Occidental mythology, and Proclus, too, declares ex pressly that myths veil the truth from sensuous men who are not worthy of it. s
But in all such doctrines, the interest of science (in the Chris tian teachings, yvwo-i? ) ultimately predominates over that of faith; they are accommodations of philosophy to the need of religious authority, felt at this time. The essential identity of authority and ofrational knowledge obtains, therefore, as the fundamental presuppo sition obtains in such degree, that just where seems threat ened, all artifices of allegorical interpretation are attempted in order to rescue it. This confidence, nevertheless, with which science pro ceeded to develop its own content as that of the religious documents, rested ultimately upon the conviction that both historical authority and scientific doctrine are but different revelations of the same divine Power.
We have seen that the belief in authority in this period grew out of the felt need of salvation and help. Another psychological root of
Phil. Vit. Mot. 657 a. (137 m. ). Procl. In Hemp. 369.
»
; it
*
a
it
3.
it,
Chap. 2, § 18. ] Authority and Revelation : Origen, Justin. 229
this belief was the enhanced importance of personality. This shows itself in the lively expression of admiration for the great men of the past, as we find it in Philo and in all lines of Platonism, and not less in the unconditional trust of the disciples in their masters, which, especially in later Neo-Platonism, degenerated to exaggerated veneration of the heads of schools. 1 This same motive appears in grandest form as a power in the world's history, in the stupendous, overpowering impression of the personality of Jesus. Faith in him was the uniting bond which held together victoriously the various and manifold tendencies of early Christianity.
But this psychological motive justified itself to theory by the consideration that the admired personality was regarded, in teach ing and life, as a revelation of the divine World-reason. The meta physical and epistemological bases for this were given in Platonism and especially in Stoicism. Attachment to the Platonic doctrine that knowledge is recollection, with the turn already expressed in Cicero that right knowledge is implanted by God in the soul, is innate within it, the carrying out of the Stoic logos doctrine, and of the idea contained in it that the rational part of the soul is a consub- stantial emanation from the divine World-reason, — all this led to regarding every form of right knowledge as a kind of divine revela tion in man. ' All knowledge as Numenius said,9 the kindling of the small light from the great light which illumines the world.
It was from this point of view that Justin, especially, conceived of the relationship maintained by him between the old philosophy and Christianity, and at the same time conceived the superiority of the latter. God has indeed revealed himself internally through the rational nature (<nripfta \6yov (fi<f>vrov) of man who created in his image, as he has revealed himself externally through the perfec tion of his creation; but the development of this universal, more potential than actual revelation, retarded by evil demons and man's sensuous impulses. God has, therefore, for man's help, em ployed the special revelation, which has appeared not only in Moses and the prophets, but also in the men of Greek science. ' Justin calls the revelation which extended to the entire human race, the
From the point of view of the history of civilisation we may notice the parallel in the boundless deification of the Roman Rmperors.
So also by the Stoics of the time of the Empire, philosophy, which among them likewise aimed to be cure for sick souls (Epictetus, Dissert. III. 23, 30), set forth as sermon of the deity himself, through the mouth of the wise
ian (ib. 36).
In Euaeb. Prcep. Ev. XI. 18, 8.
Apol. II. cf. Min Fel. Oct. 16, 6.
On the other hand, to be sure, Justin as well as Philo derives the Greek
ophy from the Jewish religion, as borrowing.
a
is
is *«»*1
8 ;
a
I.
a
is
is
*
is,
224 Hellenistic-Roman ThougJit : Religious Period. [Pa«t JQ.
But that which has appeared in former time, so dispersed and often obscured, is not the full truth : the entire, pure
logos has been revealed in Christ, Son of God, and second God.
In this teaching there prevails, on the one hand, with the Apolo gists, the effort to set forth Christianity as the true and highest phil osophy, and to show that it unites in itself all teachings ' of abiding
worth that can be discovered in the earlier philosophy. Christ is called the teacher (SiSao-KuAos), and this teacher is Reason itself.
Wort," ZQrich, 1873); and lastly the physician Claudius Galen, who died about 200, and might, to be sure, with his broad eclecticism be likewise classed as a Peri patetic and also as a Stoic (cf. K. Sprengel, Beitrage zur (reach, d. Medicin, I. 117 ff. ). From the same circle of ideas arose also the writings circulated under the name of Hermes Trismegistus, which belong to the third century (French tr. by L. Menard, Paris, 1866 ; partially published by G. Parthey, Berlin, 1864).
Among the Platonists of the second century Nicomacbus of Gerasa in Ara bia, of whose writings arithmetical text-books and (through Photius) an extract from a work ' Apitf/irjTucd Btokoyoiiuro. are extant, and Numenius of Apamea, concerning whom we owe our instruction mainly to Eusebius, are strongly Neo- Pythagorean. Cf. F. Thedinga (Bonn, 1875).
The entrance of Greek philosophy into Jewish theology may be traced back to the middle of the second century b. c, where it can be recognised in the Biblical explanation of Aristobuloa ; it appears then in a particularly marked manner, and in a form that is already much nearer the Alexandrian sphere of thought, in the pseudo-Solomonic Book of Wisdom. Yet these are but weak forerunners of the important creation of Philo of Alexandria, of whose life little more is known than that in the year 39, when already in advanced age, he was a member of an embassy from his native community to the Emperor Calig
Chap. •-». ]
The Religion* Period. 217
ola. His numerous writings, among which there is also much that is not genuine, were edited by Th. Mangey (Lond. 1742), Leips. stereotype ed. , 8 vols. , 1861-53 ; [Eng. tr. by C. D. Yonge, 4 vols. , Lond. , Bohn's lib. ].
F. Dihne, Die jiidisch-alexandrinische Beligionsphilosophie (Halle, 1834).
A. Gfrorer, Philon und die alexandrinische Theosophie (Stuttgart, 1835); M. Wolff, Die philonischt Philosophic (Gothenburg, 1858); Ewald, Gesch. de$
Volkes Israel, VI. 231 ff.
Among the Christian Apologists whose writings are collected in the Corpus
Apoioyetarum Christianorvm secundi sceculi, ed. by Otto (Jena, 1842 ff. ), the most prominent is Flavius Justin Martyr of Sichem, who lived in the middle of the second century. Two defensive writings and a dialogue with Trypho the Jew axe preserved [Eng. tr. in Ante-Nicene Ch. lib. , ed. by Roberts and Donald son. Edinburg, T. 4 T. Clark, 1867 —]. K. Semisch (2 vols. , Breslau, 1840-42), and B. Aube (Paris, 18(31) treat of him. Further Apologists from the Hellenic circle of culture are Aristldes (whose discourses, discovered in the Armenian language, were printed with a Latin translation, Venice, 1878), Athenagoras of Athens (rpta-ptla s-tpl Xpia-Ttar&e addressed to Marcus Aurelius about 176), Theophilus of Ant inch (a treatise addressed to Autolycus about 180), Melito of . Sard is, Apollinaris of Hierapolis, and others. — Latin literature presents especially Minucius Felix, whose dialogue Oft an' us was written about 200 >d. in the Corpus scriptorum ecclesiasticorum latinorum, by C. Halm, Vienna, 1W7). The rhetorician, Firmianus Lactantius (about 300), is to be placed in the same series. His main treatise is the Institution's Divinoe [tr. of the above authors in Ante-Nicene lib. , see above].
Of the Gnostics our information comes essentially through their opponents, Iren»us (140-200 ; his treatise "EXryxot «al irarpowii ttjs yf>tvSuriiu>v yriiatut, ed. by A. Stieren, Leips. 1863), Hippolytus (Kurd racwr alpioiur f\ryx°*- *'''■ by I>uncker and Schneidewin, Gottingen, 1869), Tertullian (Adversus Valenti- nianos), etc. [Eng. tr. of the above writings in Ante-Nicene lib. , above]. Of Gnostic treatises only one, and that by an unknown author, is extant, VUara npU (ed. by Petermann, Berlin, 1861). Of the main representatives of this doctrine there were active in the first half of the second century Saturninus of Antioch, Basilides, a Syrian, and Carpocrates in Alexandria ; toward the ■riddle of the century VaJentinus. the most important of them (died about let)); and toward the end of the century Bardeaanea of Mesopotamia. — Expo sitions of the Onostif Systems by A. W. Neander (Berlin, 1818) [Eng. tr. by Tnrrey, Boston, 1866], E. Matter (Paris, 1843), Chr. Baur (Tubingen, 1836), A- Hilgenfeld (Jena, 1884), same author, Bardesancs, der letzte Gnostiker <Leips. 1864). — A. Harnack, Zur QucUenkritik der Geschichte des Gnosticismus (Leips. 1873); [H. L. Mansel, Gnostic Heresies, Lond. 1876].
The most radical opponent of Greek science was TaUan, an Assyrian, whose treatise npkt "EXXijrot arose about 170, but who later became himself an adherent of the Valentinian Gnosticism. The passionate Apologist Qu. Sep- timius Florens Tertullian (195-220, for a time Presbyter in Carthage) ended likewise in opposition to the Catholic Church, in the sect of the Montanists. Hi« works have been edited by Fr. Oehler (3 vols. , Leips. 1853 f. ), recently by A ReifJt-rscheid and Wlssowa (Vol. I. Vienna, 1890, in Corp. script, eccl. tat. ) [Eng tr. in Ante-Ntcene lib. ]. Cf. A. W. Neander, Antignostifus, Geist des
Tertullian, etc. (2d ed. Berlin, 1849) [Eng. tr. Bohn's lib. , 1851J; A. Hauck, 7V» Lef>en und Schriften, Erlangen, 1877). — In the same series, but from a later lime, is the African rhetorician Arnobius, whose seven books, Adversus
G'ntes. were composed about 300 (ed. by A. KeifTerscheid in Corp. script, ecel. 1st. . Vienna, 1876).
<*1 the writings of Clement of Alexandria (died about 217) three treatises are preserved, A470I wporprrTiitit vpii *EXXqra{ — IIai6a>u>>4« — £rpw/iarcit (ed. by J. Potter, Oxford, 1716) [tr. in Ante-Nicene lib. ]. From his school (cf. on the Alex. Catechetical school, Guericke, Halle, 1824 f , and Hasselbaoh, SteUin, 1636) went forth the founder nf Christian theology, Origan, surnamed the Ada- •matine. Born 18ft a. d. in Alexandria, equipped with the full education of the time, he came forward early as a teacher, fell into conflicts on account of his doctrines with the Synod, was by it removed from his nffice, and later lived in Cawarea and Tyre, dying in the latter place 2. 14. of his writings, aside from the above-mentioned treatise against Celsus, his work lUpl ipx&' is of chief importance ; It is extant almost only in the Latin version of Kufinus (ed. by
218 Hellenistic-Roman Thought : Religious Period. [Part II
Uedepenning, Leips. 1836) [tr. in Ante-Nicene lib. ]. Cf. J. Reinkens, De Clemente Presbytero Al. (Breslau, 1851); Redepenning, 0. , Darstellung seines Lebens und seiner Lehre (Bonn, 1841-46) [cf. Bigg, The Christian Platonitts
of Alexandria, Oxford, 1887 ; A. Harnack, Art. Origen in Ene. Brit. l.
A collection of the sources for all the Church writers of this period has been
issued by J. P. Migne, Patrologia; Cursus Computus (Paris, 1840 ff. ).
A certain Ammonius Saccus appears in old traditions as the founder of Neo-Flatonism, but nothing is known to justify this tradition. To his pupils belonged Plotinus, Origen, the rhetorician Iionginua (213-273), to whom the book llepl \nj/ovt was ascribed, and another Origen.
The true founder of the school was Plotinus (204-269). Born in Lycopolis in Egypt, and educated in Alexandria, he became a member of an expedition against the Persians in order to promote his religious studies, made a highly successful appearance as teacher in Rome about 244, and died on a country estate in Campania. His works, written late in life, were published by his disciple Porphyry, arranged in six enneads. Ed. by H. Mliller (Leips. 1878-80), with a German translation [Eng. tr. in part by Th. Taylor, Lond. 1787, 1704, 1817, French tr. by Bouillet, Paris, 1857-60]. Cf. H. Kirchner, Die Philos. des PI. (Halle, 1864). — A.
Richter, Neuplatonische Studien (Halle, 1864 ff. ). — H. v. Kleist, Neuplat. Studien (Heidelberg, 1883). — [A. Harnack, Art. JVeo- Platonism in Enc. Brit. }
To the Alexandrian Neo-Platonism are reckoned further Gentilianus Ame lias of Ameria, and the Tyrian Porphyry (about 230-300). Among the ex tant writings, aside from the biographies of Plotinus and Pythagoras, are to be mentioned ' KQopnal irpAt tA mi)T&, an aphoristic abridgment of the system of Plotinus (printed in Creuzer's ed. of the works of Plotinus, Paris, 1855), the treatise On Abstemiousness (irepl iwoxv* ru>i> ^vxw, important on account of its use of the xepl t6<ref3clas of Theophrastus ; cf. J. Bernays, Berlin, 1866), and of the commentaries the Eicrayuyij elt t4i Kariryoplat (ed. by Busse, Berlin, 1877 ; and also in the Berlin ed. of Aristotle, Vol. IV. ).
Syrian Neo-Platonism was founded by Jamblichus of Chalcis in Coale- Syria (died about 330), a hearer of Porphyry. His writings were principally commentaries upon Hellenistic and Oriental theology. The following are par tially preserved : llepl tov IlvBayopucoQ plov (ed. by Westermann, Paris, 1850), A6701 rporptTT wit tit <pi\o<ro<plav (ed. by Kiessling, Leips. 1813), Iltpl rijt monnji vn0TiiuiTiKrjf hrurri)iir\t (ed. by Villoison, Venice, 1781) [Eng. tr. Life of Pyth. by Taylor, Lond. 1818, Egyptian Mysteries, by same, Chiswick, 1821].
Of the disciples of the school, Dezippus commented on the Aristotelian Categories (ed. by L. Spengel, Munich, 1859), Sallustius wrote a compendium of metaphysics (ed. by Orelli, Zurich, 1821), and Themisthis (about 317-387) made himself known as a paraph rast and commentator upon Aristotelian works. From the same circle comes the treatise De Mysteriis AUgypliorum (ed. by G. Parthey, Berlin, 1867 ; cf. Harless, Munich, 1858).
This movement had a transient political success by the accession of the Emperor Julian, who hoped by its help to renew the old religion and displace Christianity. His writings against the Christians have been edited with a German translation by K. J. Neumann (Leips. 1880). . Cf. A. W. Neander,
Ueber den Kaiser J. und sein Zeitalter (Berlin, 1812). — D. Ft. Strauss, J. der Abtriinnige, der Romantiker aufdem Throne der Cdsaren (Mannheim, 1847). — A. Mttcke, J. nach den Quellen (Gotha, 1866-68).
The founder of Athenian Neo-Platonism was Plutarch of Athens (died after 4:30), with his pupils Syrianus and Hierocles. All these, as well as the following, composed commentaries upon Platonic and Aristotelian or Pythago rean writings, which are in part preserved. More important was Proems (411-485), among whose works the most important is llepl rrjs icard IlXdrwm $eo\oylat (ed. of his works by V. Cousin, Paris, 1820-25) [Eng. tr. by Th. Taylor]. Cf. H. Kirchner, De Prod. Metaphysica (Berlin, 1846). K. Stein- hart's Art. in Ersch und GrUber's Enc.
The last head of the Platonic Academy was Damascius, of whose writings the beginning of a treatise xtpl rur rpiiruv dpxur, and the conclusion of a com mentary upon the Parmenides are extant (ed. by J. Kopp, Frankfort a. M. 1826 ; cf. E. Heitz in /Strew*. Abhdl. fur Philos. , 1884), and also a biography of
Cha*. 2, $ 18. ] Authority and Revelation. 2l9
hi> teacher Isidores. Among the commentators of this time Simplicius is prominent (on the Physic*, ed. pr. Venice, 1520, the first four books, Diels, Berlin, 1882 ; on the De Caelo, Karsten, Utrecht, 1805 ; on the Dr. Anima, Hayduck, Berlin, 1882V
The two latter wandered with their immediate associates for a time toward Persia, when in the year 529 the Emperor Justinian closed the Academy, con fiscated its property, and by forbidding lectures on heathen philosophy gave the external confirmation to its close.
§ 18. Authority and Revelation.
The imperturbable self-certainty and self-mastery which the post- Aristotelian philosophy had sought and in part claimed for the wise man, had been so deeply shaken with the progress of time that it had given place to a feeling of the need of help, both in the ethical and in the theoretical spheres. The philosophising individual no longer had confidence that he could attain to right insight or to his soul's salvation by his own strength, and sought his help accord ingly, partly amid the great monuments of the past, partly in a divine revelation. Both tendencies, however, are ultimately upon the same basis, for the confidence which was placed in the men and writings of a previous time rested only upon the fact that they were regarded as especially favoured vessels of higher revelation. Authority, therefore, acquired its value as the mediate, historically accredited revelation, while the divine illumination of the individ ual as immediate revelation came to its assistance. Differently as the relation between these two forms was conceived of, it is yet the
common mark of all Alexandrian philosophy that it regards divine revelation as the highest source of knowledge. Already in this inno vation in the theory of knowledge, we find expressed the heightened value which this period put upon personality, and on personality as evincing itself in the feelings. The longing of this time desired that the truth might be found by experience, as an inner commun ion of man with the Supreme Being.
1. The appeal to authority often makes its appearance in Greek and Hellenistic philosophy in the sense of a confirmation and strengthening of an author's own views, but not as a decisive and conclusive argument. The jurare in verba magistri might be usual enough among the subordinate members of the schools,' but the heads of schools, and in general the men who engaged in indepen dent research, maintained an attitude toward the teachings of the former time that was much more one of criticism than of uncondi-
subjection ; ' and though in the schools, chiefly the Academic
>Though even the well-known atrr&i tpa [ipte dixit] of the Pythagoreans U " only through later writers (Cicero).
* Even the admiration of Socrates, in which all the following schools were at e, dkd nut in Itself lead to hi* being regarded as the valid authority for defi le philosophical doctrine*.
220 Hellenistic- Roman Thought : Religious Period. [Pabt 1L
and Peripatetic, the inclination to preserve and maintain the teaching of the founder as an unassailable treasure was fostered by the custom of commenting upon his works, yet in all the conflict as to the criteria of truth the principle had never been brought forward that something must be believed because this or that great man had said it.
How strongly the need for authority had come to be felt in the later time, we may recognise even from the countless interpolations which were the order of the day in the whole Alexandrian litera ture. Their authors, who, perhaps, for the most part acted in good faith, since they themselves regarded their thoughts as only devel opments and continuations of the old doctrines, evidently believed that they could get a hearing for their works in no better way than by assigning to them the name of one of the heroes of wisdom, of an Aristotle, a Plato, or a Pythagoras. This phenomenon appeared most extensively among the Neo- Pythagoreans, whose chief con cern it was to invest their new doctrine with the halo of ancient wisdom. But the more the convictions that were to be established in this manner bore a religious character, the more lively became the need to conceive of these authorities themselves as the bearers of a religious revelation, and therefore all the traits that might stamp them as such were sought for within them or even read into them. Not contented, however, with this, the later Greeks believed that they could give a higher sanction to their philosophy, as well as to their entire civilisation, by deriving it from the Oriental religions : thus Numenius* did not hesitate to maintain that Pythagoras and Plato had presented only the old wisdom of the Brahmans, Magi, Egyptians, and Jews. As a result of this, the extent of literary authorities increased extraordinarily; the later Neo-Platonists, a Jamblichus and Proclus, commented not only on Greek philosophers, but also upon the entire Hellenic and barbarian theology,2 and credulously adopted myths and miraculous tales from these sources.
In quite a similar manner Oriental literature testified also to its esteem for Hellenism. Among the predecessors of Philo, Aristo- bulus especially appealed to verses which were interpolated in Orpheus and Linus, in Homer and Hesiod ; and with Philo himself, the great Jewish theologian, the great men of Greek philosophy appear side by side with the Old Testament, as bearers of wisdom.
The felt need of authority naturally asserts itself most strongly in the unconditional faith in religious records. Here the Old Testa-
• In Eus. Proep. Ec. IX. 7. a Marinus, Prod. Vit. 22.
Chaf. 2, J 18. ] Authority and Revelation : Philo. 221
ment was from the beginning the firm foundation for the science and philosophy of Judaism and also for that of (orthodox) Christian ity. But in the Christian Church the need of establishing a collec tion of writings in which the system of faith should be defined with certainty, first developed with Marcion, and then was gradually satisfied in the completion and conclusion of the New Testament: with Irenseus and Tertullian both Testaments already appear with
the full value and validity of churchly authority.
2. If now in this way even scientific thought, which in conse
quence of sceptical disintegration no longer gave itself credit for the power of truth, subjected itself voluntarily to the authorities of antiquity and to religious institution, it was yet in nowise bound thereby to the extent that we might suppose. This relation rather took the form, along all lines, of extracting from the authoritative sources, and also of reading into them, the scientific doctrines which arose from the new religious movements. 1
Where in so doing they did not resort expressly to those inter polations which are found more or less in the entire literature of the period as well as in Neo-Pythagoreanism, they employed as their instrument the method of allegorical interpretation.
This meets us first in Jewish theology. It had its prototype indeed in the allegorical interpretation of myths, which made its appearance early in Grecian literature, was employed by the Sophists, and extensively prosecuted by the Stoics. It was applied to relig ious documents by Aristobulus, but it was Philo1 who carried it through methodically, proceeding from the conviction that a dis tinction must be made in Scripture between the literal and the spiritual meaning, between its body and its soul. In order to teach his commands to the great mass of men, who in their sensuous nature are unable to apprehend the divine purely, God gave to revelation the anthropomorphic form, behind which only the spirit ually mature man penetrates to the true sense. This sense is to be vmght in the philosophical conceptions which lie hidden in the historical husks. Accordingly, since Philo the task of theology has been directed toward interpreting religious documents into a sys tem of scientific doctrines ; and if he uses Greek philosophy for this
and finds in it the higher meaning of the Scripture, he
1 Kren a man like Plutarch of Cbssronea, who follow* the writing of Plato M be would the revelation* of a religious document, does not scruple to ii'tro- incr rata the teaching of his master Aristotelian and Stoic doctrines as well as ha'own religious view.
CL Siegfried, Philon e. Alexandria als Amleger de* alien Testament! ■Jena. 1876).
purpose,
222 Hellenistic-Roman Thought : Religious Period. [Part IL
explains this relation on the ground that the thinkers of Greece have drawn from Mosaic documents. 1
Following his example, the Gnostics then attempted to transform Oriental myths into Greek conceptions by allegorical interpretation, and thought thus to develop a secret doctrine of the Apostolic tradition, — the Apologists maintained the harmony of Christian doctrine with the dogmas of Greek philosophy, — even men like Irenaeus and Tertullian worked upon the New Testament, —and finally Origen knew how to bring the philosophy of Christianity into accord with its documents. The great Alexandrian theologian, like the Gnostics who first attempted to create a Christian theology, distinguished between the carnal (somatic), psychical, and spiritual
(pneumatic) conceptions of the religious records, — corresponding to the metaphysico-anthropological ideas of the time"(cf. § 19 f. ). For him the literal historical tradition yields only a Christianity according to the flesh " (xpurrumcr/iof <tw^oti»co«), and it is the task of theology to lead out of this, through the moral significance at which the " psychical " readers stop, to the ideal content of the Scripture, which must then illumine the reader as self-evident truth. Only he who grasps this last belongs to the pneumatic or spiritual readers, to whom the eternal gospel thus disclosed reveals itself.
This extraction of philosophical meaning from religious tradition is found in fullest extent among the Xeo-Platonists. Jamblichus practises in accordance with the Stoic model, on all forms of Oriental and Occidental mythology, and Proclus, too, declares ex pressly that myths veil the truth from sensuous men who are not worthy of it. s
But in all such doctrines, the interest of science (in the Chris tian teachings, yvwo-i? ) ultimately predominates over that of faith; they are accommodations of philosophy to the need of religious authority, felt at this time. The essential identity of authority and ofrational knowledge obtains, therefore, as the fundamental presuppo sition obtains in such degree, that just where seems threat ened, all artifices of allegorical interpretation are attempted in order to rescue it. This confidence, nevertheless, with which science pro ceeded to develop its own content as that of the religious documents, rested ultimately upon the conviction that both historical authority and scientific doctrine are but different revelations of the same divine Power.
We have seen that the belief in authority in this period grew out of the felt need of salvation and help. Another psychological root of
Phil. Vit. Mot. 657 a. (137 m. ). Procl. In Hemp. 369.
»
; it
*
a
it
3.
it,
Chap. 2, § 18. ] Authority and Revelation : Origen, Justin. 229
this belief was the enhanced importance of personality. This shows itself in the lively expression of admiration for the great men of the past, as we find it in Philo and in all lines of Platonism, and not less in the unconditional trust of the disciples in their masters, which, especially in later Neo-Platonism, degenerated to exaggerated veneration of the heads of schools. 1 This same motive appears in grandest form as a power in the world's history, in the stupendous, overpowering impression of the personality of Jesus. Faith in him was the uniting bond which held together victoriously the various and manifold tendencies of early Christianity.
But this psychological motive justified itself to theory by the consideration that the admired personality was regarded, in teach ing and life, as a revelation of the divine World-reason. The meta physical and epistemological bases for this were given in Platonism and especially in Stoicism. Attachment to the Platonic doctrine that knowledge is recollection, with the turn already expressed in Cicero that right knowledge is implanted by God in the soul, is innate within it, the carrying out of the Stoic logos doctrine, and of the idea contained in it that the rational part of the soul is a consub- stantial emanation from the divine World-reason, — all this led to regarding every form of right knowledge as a kind of divine revela tion in man. ' All knowledge as Numenius said,9 the kindling of the small light from the great light which illumines the world.
It was from this point of view that Justin, especially, conceived of the relationship maintained by him between the old philosophy and Christianity, and at the same time conceived the superiority of the latter. God has indeed revealed himself internally through the rational nature (<nripfta \6yov (fi<f>vrov) of man who created in his image, as he has revealed himself externally through the perfec tion of his creation; but the development of this universal, more potential than actual revelation, retarded by evil demons and man's sensuous impulses. God has, therefore, for man's help, em ployed the special revelation, which has appeared not only in Moses and the prophets, but also in the men of Greek science. ' Justin calls the revelation which extended to the entire human race, the
From the point of view of the history of civilisation we may notice the parallel in the boundless deification of the Roman Rmperors.
So also by the Stoics of the time of the Empire, philosophy, which among them likewise aimed to be cure for sick souls (Epictetus, Dissert. III. 23, 30), set forth as sermon of the deity himself, through the mouth of the wise
ian (ib. 36).
In Euaeb. Prcep. Ev. XI. 18, 8.
Apol. II. cf. Min Fel. Oct. 16, 6.
On the other hand, to be sure, Justin as well as Philo derives the Greek
ophy from the Jewish religion, as borrowing.
a
is
is *«»*1
8 ;
a
I.
a
is
is
*
is,
224 Hellenistic-Roman ThougJit : Religious Period. [Pa«t JQ.
But that which has appeared in former time, so dispersed and often obscured, is not the full truth : the entire, pure
logos has been revealed in Christ, Son of God, and second God.
In this teaching there prevails, on the one hand, with the Apolo gists, the effort to set forth Christianity as the true and highest phil osophy, and to show that it unites in itself all teachings ' of abiding
worth that can be discovered in the earlier philosophy. Christ is called the teacher (SiSao-KuAos), and this teacher is Reason itself.
