The relationship between orality and literacy is one of the most debated in the scholarship on the ancient world, particularly in that on ancient philosophy. This may be largely due to the famous Platonic criticism of writing, which can be found not only in Phaedrus but also in other passages of his corpus (especially in the Seventh Letter). The aim of Mathilde Cambron-Goulet’s volume (a revised version of her PhD thesis at the University of Montréal, 2012) is to explore this relationship in the transmission of philosophical knowledge in the period that spans from Socrates to the last Neoplatonists.

After a clear preface by Louis-André Dorion (9–11), the book begins with an introduction (13–21) which establishes the terms of the question, and the issues the author’s analysis aims to address. These can be framed as follows: how was the transmission of knowledge understood by ancient philosophers? What roles did orality and literacy play? In doing so, the author divides her analysis into four chapters.

The first chapter (‘Le corps du philosophe’) discusses the importance of the relationship between master and disciple in philosophical practice. In this sense, a crucial role is played by the notion of ‘intercourse’ (sunousia), and Cambron-Goulet brilliantly stresses the significant implications of the concepts of school, friendship (philia) and love (erōs). She discusses texts ranging from Socrates to the Neoplatonists, with a focus on the Socratic circle, and particularly Aeschines of Sphettus. From these fifth- and fourth-century philosophers, the sometimes erotic nature of the relationship between master and disciple clearly emerges. This part would have been enriched by a broad reflection on Epicureanism, a philosophy in which the notions of ‘community’ and friendship play an important role.

In the second chapter (‘Quels sont les objets qui servent à la transmission de la philosophie?’), as the title suggests, Cambron-Goulet explores the objects through which knowledge is transmitted, namely books. The author provides insightful and precise focus on this topic, revealing the unique nature of the book: not only an object of value, it also has an intellectual dimension and plays a role in philosophical education. The author demonstrates how books were important even for schools of thought like Cynicism, which generally considered materiality as superfluous to the aim living an extremely simple life.

In the following chapter (‘Quelles pratiques avec quels objets?’), Cambron-Goulet specifically discusses the ‘practices’ of transmitting philosophical knowledge. In these pages, the author shows, with various examples and texts, the ancient preference for orality, or more precisely for the practice of life, over writing and reading. Practically, written texts can serve as support, even a mnemonic, for those who already practise and understand philosophical ideas. The text appears more as an aide-mémoire than an object for conveying knowledge (142). In this sense, philosophy differs from other disciplines that can be learned by studying specific books.

The final chapter (‘Les lieux de transmission des savoirs philosophiques’) is dedicated to the ‘places’ (in a broad sense) where philosophical knowledge is transmitted. Cambron-Goulet elegantly discusses the literary genre of the dialogue, particularly that of Socrates and Plato. Another important ‘place’ is the philosophical banquet (sumposion). Her attention is primarily on Plato’s and Xenophon’s Symposium, but she also delves into Plutarch’s Banquet of the Seven Sages and Athenaeus’ Deipnosophists. In this analysis of the relationship between oral and written knowledge, which also concerns the pre-Socratic philosophers (192–200), the author also rightly draws attention to the important influence of the chreia genre. Then the book concludes with an analysis of the ‘commentaries’, especially Neoplatonic.

In the brief conclusion (211–15) Cambron-Goulet highlights the results of her analysis. First, the elitist nature of knowledge transmission in ancient times: philosophical knowledge is primarily transmitted through a privileged relationship with the teacher and within a group of other followers. Second, the concern for the recipients of the philosophical message accounts for the preference for orality. Finally, the most significant and intriguing conclusion is that, contrary to the opinion of notable scholars, there is no ‘evolutionary’ concept of the relationship between orality and literacy in antiquity (though Greek society transitioned from an oral to a written phase, with Plato representing an intermediate phase). On the contrary, Cambron-Goulet’s analyses show that the critiques of writing remained fairly consistent throughout antiquity. The volume is rounded off with a comprehensive bibliography, an index locorum, an index verborum and an ‘index des notions’ (263–65).

The author’s meticulous research, insightful analysis and interesting approach make this book a significant contribution to the study of knowledge transmission up to the end of antiquity. This can be defined as an ambitious and courageous volume, as it seeks to analyse this important theme across the entire span of Ancient Philosophy. Indeed, even if Cambron-Goulet claims at the beginning of the volume (16) that her study does not deal with the testimonia on the Presocratics as they do not contain any passage concerning writing, she does in fact discuss these authors in various passages (192–200) and demonstrates interesting interactions between orality and literacy in their works and activities. Cambron-Goulet deserves appreciation for writing a book that has the potential to appeal to a wide audience. Playfully, one could say that, in contrast to the ancient elitist view, her book will undoubtedly provide food for thought for all those engaged in the study of ancient philosophy, and not only to those strictly interested in the theme of orality and literacy, or in the well-known Platonic criticisms.