Content area
Full text
This essay begins with an examination of two Neoplatonic biographies, Porphyry's Life of Pythagoras and Iamblichus' On the Pythagorean Life. In contrast to the traditional picture of Neoplatonic disinterest in classical political philosophy, engagement with classical Platonic political philosophy actually forms an important component of these texts. The author then turns to an examination of Eusebius' Praeparatio Evangelica to argue that Eusebius' extensive comparisons of Moses' legislation with Plato's Laws in Book 12 of the PE should be evaluated in the context of contemporary Neoplatonic political thought. Finally, the essay offers some concluding comments on the timbre such discussions of political philosophy, both Neoplatonic and Eusebian, would have had in the context of the Roman Empire of the early fourth century.
In his biography of Plotinus, Porphyry tells the story of his teacher's intention to found a new city: Platonopolis.1 This was to be a city of philosophers, governed by the Laws of Plato.2 Porphyry's story is perplexing for two reasons. First, traditional wisdom supposes Neoplatonists like Plotinus and Porphyry to have been at best apathetic, and at worst hostile, to politics. Second, founding a city based on the blueprint provided by a Platonic dialogue implies a degree of engagement with classical political philosophy that one cannot normally imagine either Plotinus or Porphyry undertaking.3 During the two decades after Porphyry wrote about Platonopolis, Eusebius of Caesarea described another ideal society in his massive two-volume apologetic Praeparatio/Demonstratio Evangelica (PE/DE hereafter)-the Christian church. Eusebius traces the history of this "godly polity," from its origins among the pre-Mosaic patriarchs to the institutionalized ecclesia of his own day. Unlike his Neoplatonic contemporaries, Eusebius is widely recognized for his contributions to political philosophy. All students of late antiquity, of course, know him as the first Imperial theologian. As for the classical Platonic tradition of political speculation, this lay decrepit beside Neoplatonic apathy and Eusebian Caesaropapism.
This traditional evaluation of the state of political philosophy at the turn of the fourth century demands serious revision. To this end, I begin this essay by examining two Neoplatonic biographies, Porphyry's Life of Pythagoras and Iamblichus' On the Pythagorean Life. I hope to demonstrate that, against the traditional picture of Neoplatonic disinterest in classical political philosophy, engagement with classical Platonic political philosophy actually...