No abstract

No abstract

The new inscription dedicated to his father by the Aristotelian commentator Alexander of Aphrodisias does not help us in establishing his dates more precisely. It does, however, show conclusively for the first time that his post was at Athens, and strongly suggests that at the end of the second century AD the term diadokhos 'successor' was applied to the imperially appointed holders of the chairs of philosophy at Athens. It also provides us with a possible candidate for the authorship of works attributed to Alexander of Aphrodisias but not apparently by him, notably Onfevers.Alexander of Aphrodisias, the commentator on Aristotle, has up till now been a rather shadowy figure historically; many of his works survive, and more are known from extensive quotations in later writers, but about his life and career little was known beyond the one fact, attested in the prologue to his treatise On Fate, that at some time between AD 198 and 209 he was appointed to a post of teacher of Aristotelian philosophy sponsored by the emperors.' The discovery ofthe inscription by him at Aphrodisias to his father gives him a reality for us as an individual which he did not have before.' It is the purpose of the present paper to examine what new information and insights the inscription provides.3

I Three texts from antiquity preserve a distinctive classification of providence into three levels.' In probable order of composition it appears in the work De Plutone attributed to Apuleius (fl. c.160 AD), in the treatise Defuto attributed to Plutarch but certainly not by him, and in the treatise De nuturu horninis by Nemesius of Emesa (c.400 AD).T1. et primam quidem providentiam esse summi exsuperantissimique deorum omnium, qui non solum deos caelicolas ordinavit, quos ad tutelam et decus per omnia mundi membra dispersit, sed natura etiam mortales eos, qui praestarent sapientia ceteris terrenis animantibus, ad aevitatem temporis edidit fundatisque legibus reliquarum dispositionem ac tutelam rerum, quas cotidie fieri necesse est, diis ceteris tradidit. unde susceptam provinciam dii secundae providentiae ita naviter retinent, ut omnia, etiam quae caelitus mortalibus exhibentur, immutabilem ordinationis paternae statum teneant. daemones vero, quos Genios et Lares possumus nuncupare, ministros deorum arbitratur custodesque hominum et interpretes, si quid a diis velint.And the primary providence is that of the highest and most supreme of all gods, who not only set in order the gods who dwell in heaven, whom he spread through all the parts of the universe for [its] safeguarding and glory, but also through nature brought into life within time those mortal creatures who surpass the other terrestrial creatures in wisdom [ie. human beings]; and after establishing [his] laws he handed over to the other gods the arranging and safeguarding of the things which must happen day by day. From here the gods took over the governing of secondary providence, and maintain it so strenuously that ' This paper is a revisiting, in the context of the history of the influence and interpretation of the Timaeus, of some old academic haunts, in an attempt to set out the evidence systematically and to clarify the issues with a view to a larger long-tern project concerned with the history of ancient conceptions of divine providence. The paper as presented here takes account of discussion at the seminar where it was given on 19th March 2001 at the Institute of Classical Studies.My thanks for contributions to the discussion are due in particular to Alan Lacey, Anne Sheppard and Lucas Siorvanes. Cf., with references to earlier literature, J. M. Dillon, The Middle Platonisfs (2nd edn, London 1996) 324-26; R. W. Sharples, 'Nemesius of Emesa and some theories of divine providence', Vig. Christ. 37 (1983) 141-56 (141-42 and 148-52); id., 'Aristotelian Theology after Aristotle', in Traditions ofTheology, eds. D. Frede and A. Laks (Leiden 2002) 1-40 (30-36). The topic was also considered in my 1995 inaugural lecture, 'World under management? Details, delegation and divine providence, 400 BC -AD 1200.' For the general background cf. M. Dragona-Monachou, 'Divine Providence in the Philosophy of the Empire', in Aufstieg und Niedergang der romischen Welt, eds H. Temporini and W. Haase, vol. II.36.7 (Berlin 1994) 4417-90. Ancient approaches to Plato's 'Timaeu...

No abstract