Plotinus the Master and the Apotheosis of Imperial Platonism

Unlike other recent studies, Plotinus the Master and the Apotheosis of Imperial Platonism is critical of Plotinus, and in particular of his version of Platonism, here described as “Imperial.” It is in contrast with Plato—a teacher whose dialogues challenge his students to think for themselves—that William H. F. Altman presents Plotinus as a master, who uses a seductive form of rhetoric throughout the Enneads to persuade his disciples to ignore his self-contradictions and decontextualized quotations from Plato while instead regarding his spiritual experiences, combined with a gift for the creative synthesis of previous thinkers, as the principal basis of their faithful and uncritical allegiance. While setting Plotinus in the context of the Roman Empire and his own critique of the Gnostics, this book grapples throughout with his current and virtually uncritical reception.

Table of Contents:
Introduction: The Idea of Imperial Platonism Chapter 1. Plotinus the Master Section 1. Teachers and Masters Section 2. The Exegete of the Platonic Revelation Section 3. Platonic Exegesis §1: Theaetetus 176a8-b2 Section 4. Plotinian Exegesis §1: 4.8 Section 5. Defending the Master Section 6. Between Apollonius and Julian §1: Returning to the Cave Section 7. Plotinus and Plato’s Ion Chapter 2. Porphyry the Disciple Section 1. Three Portraits of the Master in Porphyry’s Life of Plotinus Section 2. The Master’s Favorite Disciple Section 3. Plotinian Exegesis §2: Longinus, Concerning the End (20.68-76) Section 4. Between Apollonius and Julian §2: Pythagoras Reborn Section 5. Longinus, [Longinus], and Anti-Imperial Platonism Section 6. Platonic Exegesis §2: (R. 509b1-9) Section 7. The Other Side of Porphyry’s Life of Plotinus Chapter 3. Porphyry’s Successors Section 1. The Apologetic Moment in the Interpretation of Porphyry’s Life of Plotinus Section 2. “A Text Worthy of Plotinus” Section 3. The Reason Why Section 4. Between Apollonius and Julian §3: Praising the Pagan Wise Man Section 5. Plotinian Exegesis §3: 5.5 Section 6. Platonic Exegesis §3: (R. 506d7-507a5) Section 7. Richard Harder and the Großschrift Chapter 4. Imperial Platonism and the Gnostics Section 1. In Defense of Dualism Section 2. Nag Hammadi Section 3. Gnosticism as Anti-Imperial Platonism Section 4. Platonic Exegesis §4: Timaeus 28b2-c2, Republic 517a8-b6, Laws 945e2-946a1 Section 5. Between Apollonius and Julian §4: Solar Theology Section 6. Plotinian Exegesis §4: 2.9 Section 7. Mazurism Chapter 5. Pierre Hadot and the Real Plotinus Section 1. Between Apollonius and Julian §5: “The End of Paganism” Section 2. Mazur and Hadot Section 3. Hadot’s Plotinus Section 4. Platonic Exegesis §5: Sophist 248e7-249a3 Section 5. The Real Plato? Section 6. Plotinian Exegesis §5: 6.7 Section 7. The Revival of Plotinus: Why Now? Chapter 6. Plotinus on Plato’s One Section 1. Between Reading and Misreading: Apollonius and Julian §6 Section 2. Interpretive Sophistry Section 3. Why Plato’s One is not the Idea of the Good Section 4. Plotinus the Demiurge Section 5. Platonic Exegesis §6: Parmenides 143a4-9 Section 6. The Pre-Existent “Stuff” of 6.6 Section 7. Plotinian Exegesis §6: 6.6 Chapter 7. The Rhetorical Apotheosis of Imperial Platonism Section 1. Plotinus Orator Section 2. Between Apollonius and Julian §7: Philostratus and Eunapius Section 3. Dispositio Section 4. Cosmos as Prophet and the Pagan Holy Man Section 5. Plotinian Exegesis §7: 4.7.10 Section 6. Platonic Exegesis §7: Letters 312e4-313a6 Section 7. pe????? d?µ???????

About the Author :
William H. F. Altman is an independent scholar.

Review :
From the point of view of the history of philosophy, the book’s notable strength lies in its provision of novel, and in certain instances significant, interpretations of select passages from the Enneads and Plotinus’s philosophical concepts, which are studied in the light of their historical context: this is especially the case with the analyses of Plotinus’s political philosophy and the emphasis on his involvement with the imperial court. The basic opposition in Altman’s impressive study is between ‘genuine Platonism’ and Plotinus’ ‘Imperial Platonism.’ Issuing from his voluminous work on the dialogues, Altman’s genuine Platonism is dualistic and demands that the philosopher engage with the messy reality of political life. Imperial Platonism, in contrast, assimilates the sensible to the intelligible, combining the temptations of ‘flight’ and ‘assimilation to god’ with the potentially tyrannical ideal of reforming the political realm in light of the intelligible. Given this opposition between Plato and Plotinus, Altman documents biases that shape the peculiar sympathy Plotinus scholars show towards him, with some even considering him to be the ultimate exponent of Platonism and the most reliable exegete of Plato: an imposition of Imperial Platonism on Plato through a focus on the Timaeus at the expense of Republic; an editorial and interpretive tendency to apologise for Plotinus’ exegetical infelicities and sleights of hand; and a hostility to research that finds Gnostic influences on Plotinus. Altman’s grasp of the history of Plotinian scholarship is remarkable, and his insight into its major figures is invaluable. He supports his points by closely argued and persuasive evidence. His overall argument is bold, and the controversy it will undoubtedly provoke is its highest recommendation. This book is written with wisdom, vigour, learning, and courage. Altman has the courage to distinguish Neoplatonism from a more authentic Platonism, which did not show the same political supinity; the courage to say that Gnostic dualism is neither a myth nor an aberration and exploits an existing strain in Greek philosophy; the courage to set Plotinus between Apollonius of Tyana and Julian the Apostate, who are often dismissed as amateurs in philosophy because they are so openly political. In short, this is a book about what ought to matter in the history of ideas, and surely the most profound interrogation of conventional histories of the Platonic tradition since Lloyd Gerson's Aristotle and other Platonists. Erudite and original – like the numerous other works Altman has published –, this book is overtly polemical, challenging long-established convictions and practices of Plotinian and Neoplatonic scholarship. The claims are bold and the criticisms are severe, as Altman does not approach his subject with the indulgence and sympathy that not few historians of philosophy use to have for it. Either to dismiss Altman’s claims and criticisms or to re-evaluate our understanding of Plotinus and his followers, this book will prove to be obligatory reading for any student of the Platonic tradition.