In the last 25 years there have been several important contributions to the research on Olympiodorus of Alexandria. The annotated translations of On Gorgias (R. Jackson, K. Lycos and H. Tarrant [1998]) and On First Alcibiades (M. Griffin [2015–16]), complementing the older translation of On Phaedo (L.G. Westerink [1976]), have given English-speaking readers the opportunity to study all of Olympiodorus’ remaining commentaries on Plato; these works have also been translated into Italian (F. Filippi [2017]). The Alexandrian master's Aristotelian exegesis has become more accessible as well, thanks to the translations of parts of the commentaries on Meteorology (C. Viano [2006]) and Categories (S. Gertz [2018]), but it is Olympiodorus’ interpretation of Plato that has drawn more attention. Specifically, scholars such as F. Renaud (Rhétorique philosophique [2006]; La connaissance de soi [2009]; Socrates’ Divine Sign [2012]; The Elenctic Strategies [2014]), H. Tarrant (Olympiodorus and Proclus [2007]) and B. Bohle (Olympiodors Kommentar [2020]) have shown how sophisticated Olympiodorus’ reading of Plato in the classroom was. Olympiodorus’ teaching has also been studied from the point of view of religious controversies, as he was a pagan philosopher teaching to a predominantly Christian audience. H. Tarrant (Olympiodorus and the Surrender of Paganism [1997]) and M.J. Griffin (Pliable Platonism? [2014]) have convincingly argued that, in order to understand Olympiodorus’ attitude towards Christianity, one must consider his views on education and philosophy, and specifically the idea that the ultimate purpose of both paideia and philosophia is the achievement of all the virtues. The result of these studies is that now Olympiodorus must be seen as an original thinker who developed a consistent interpretation of Plato's works as a guide towards a philosophical life.
The book under review, originating from a conference held in Utrecht in 2017, is the natural continuation of this research. The most prominent scholars who study Olympiodorus – including those mentioned in the previous paragraph – have contributed to the volume, and it also follows up the lines of research just highlighted: Olympiodorus’ Platonic exegesis, his relationship with Christianity, and his view on virtues (of course this is just one of several possible ways of classifying the chapters of the book – for example, in the introduction to the book, Joosse divides the contributions into ‘four areas of interest: the profile of the philosopher that we find in Olympiodorus’ work; his interest in perception and knowledge of itself; his concern with the form of philosophical communication; and his position vis-à-vis his Christian surroundings’ [p. 5]).
Olympiodorus’ interpretation of Plato's dialogues is the subject of the chapters written by B. Bohle and A. Sheppard. Bohle focuses on ‘The Neoplatonists Hermias and Olympiodorus on Plato's Theory of Rhetoric’, arguing that in Olympiodorus’ eyes (just like in Hermias’) both Plato's condemnation of rhetoric in the Gorgias and his positive remarks on the same art in the Phaedrus stem from a single, consistent theory. According to Olympiodorus, Plato had a complex but coherent view on rhetoric. Rhetoric was not the only technê that influenced Plato's philosophy according to Olympiodorus, as Sheppard shows in her contribution ‘Olympiodorus on Drama’. In fact, Sheppard points out how Olympiodorus is aware of the dramatic techniques used by Plato to put forward theoretical and moral theories.
Olympiodorus’ relationship with his mostly Christian students is the subject of S. Fortier's chapter, ‘Olympiodorus, Christianity, and Metensomatosis’. Fortier notices that, while Olympiodorus seems generally ready to adapt his teaching to the religious beliefs of his audience, he does not step away from the doctrine that, after the death of the body, the soul moves on to a new body, even though this idea is clearly unacceptable to a Christian. Fortier argues that the reason why Olympiodorus intentionally stressed his personal endorsement of this doctrine is that it had become a symbol of allegiance to Platonism. In Fortier's interpretation Olympiodorus wanted to remind his students that, while he was not hostile to Christians, he was not a Christian himself. Indeed, the issue of Olympiodorus’ relationship with Christianity is closely linked to his Platonic exegesis, and this is particularly clear in the essays by F. Renaud and H. Tarrant. In ‘Reconciling Philosophy with Poetry’ Renaud argues that Olympiodorus’ statements about philosophical myths shed light both on his interpretation of Plato's dialogues and on the way he manages to teach pagan philosophy to a mostly Christian audience. Olympiodorus explains that philosophical myths have two meanings, as the surface meaning is a harmless image of the allegorical truth. Renaud argues that Olympiodorus applies this double reading not just to myths, but also to Socrates’ logoi, which are not harmful in themselves, but must be considered as riddles, which, once solved, allow one to reach the true meaning of the discourses. Indeed, according to Renaud, Olympiodorus may apply this two-level model of communication derived from his meditation on myths not only to the non-mythical parts of Plato's dialogues, but also to his own teaching, as he seems to use common notions, which could be easily accepted by his Christian students, to refer to deeper truths. Treating Olympiodorus’ take on ‘Special Kinds of Platonic Discourse’, Tarrant argues that having to deal with a mostly Christian environment is one of the two main reasons why Olympiodorus is less willing than Proclus to state that Plato was in some passages inspired by a divine power. The other reason is that Olympiodorus tends to give more importance to demonstrations than to the other kinds of Platonic discourses – this insight on Olympiodorus’ theory of argumentation is further developed in another 2021 paper by Tarrant (‘Formal Argument’, HPLA 24) and seems a fruitful approach to the Alexandrian commentator's work.
The central role of virtues in Olympiodorus’ thought has become clearer in recent years, and it is not by chance that more than a third of the chapters in the book are specifically devoted to Olympiodorus’ views on virtues – specifically those by M.J. Griffin, D.A. Layne, Joosse and A. Motta. In ‘Olympiodorus on the Scale of Virtues’ Griffin provides an analysis of all the virtues, showing that, even though they form a definite scale (higher virtues build on lower ones), they can and should be expressed at the same time. For Olympiodorus, civic virtues should not be dismissed once one reaches the stage of contemplating the divine: on the contrary, one must pursue both contemplation and civic duties. What one should not do is to stop at lower virtues, especially at the lowest ones: the pre-philosophical ones – that is to say, the ones that derive from one's nature or habits. The reason why people do not progress over these kinds of virtues is not just that they do not know the true nature of reality and morality, but also that they do not even know that they do not know. Olympiodorus’ take on this double ignorance is the subject of Layne's essay, ‘The Virtue of Double Ignorance in Olympiodorus’. Layne shows that, while Olympiodorus draws on Proclus’ description of double ignorance and of ways to purify oneself from it, he goes beyond the master of his master (Olympiodorus studied under Ammonius, who in turn was a pupil of Proclus) by presenting a different, specular kind of double ignorance as one of the highest philosophical virtues. Joosse focuses on ‘Olympiodorus’ View of Civic Self-Knowledge’, highlighting how this view differs from modern ones. While today we tend to confine self-knowledge to the awareness of our embodied selves, Olympiodorus thinks that one does not really know oneself if he or she does not assimilate to the divine. What these essays show is that for Olympiodorus, one should strive to climb all the steps of the ladder of virtues. Motta, in ‘The Life of Plato in Introductory Schemes’, argues that this ladder is reproduced in the biography of Plato that Olympiodorus includes in the preface of his commentary on the First Alcibiades. Seen in this light, Olympiodorus’ Life of Plato plays a crucial role in the presentation of Plato's philosophy to students that are about to read the dialogues for the first time, as it shows the path towards moral excellence that unfolds in the dialogues.
I have already mentioned a couple of papers that highlight Olympiodorus’ originality with respect to Proclus. P. Lautner, treating ‘Olympiodorus’ Notion of αἴσθησις and Its Historical Context’, adds one more example of such originality. Lautner shows that, by stating that sense-perception can grasp substances and universals, Olympiodorus deliberately distances himself from Proclus. Finally, C. Viano writes on ‘Olympiodorus and Greco-Alexandrian Alchemy’, addressing the problem of the authorship of the commentary on Zosimus’ On Action attributed to Olympiodorus in the manuscripts. Contrary to most scholars, who consider the commentary spurious, Viano argues that Olympiodorus is the author of the first part of the work, which contains the commentary proper.
From this cursory summary it should be clear that this book is a contribution of central importance to research on Olympiodorus. The authors draw interesting conclusions from existing lines of research and add new elements to them. Even more interestingly, some fascinating links between topics are proposed – the commonalities between interpreting Plato's dialogues and teaching pagan philosophy in a Christian context being especially captivating. However, the merits of this book go beyond an update of the status quaestionis on topics already at the centre of scholars’ attention, as new perspectives are opened. The analysis of Olympiodorus’ view of different kinds of philosophical discourses and the study of the commentator's psychological faculties look like particularly fruitful investigations. Even though one can think of some more unexplored research paths (for example, Olympiodorus’ commentaries on Aristotle offer several compelling topics to study), this book is certainly a must-read for anyone interested in Olympiodorus, the late school of Alexandria or generally the vast universe of what is commonly called ‘Neoplatonism’.
