Cambridge Ancient Hi.. - Index of

philosophy in alexandria 847
who picks up the image of Syrianus as an arbitrator, while an anonymous
commentary on the De interpretatione reports Syrianus as contradicting
Aristotle and showing a view of his to be false. 27
It is true that both Proclus and Syrianus studied and taught Aristotle and,
like the other Neoplatonists, regarded his views as fundamentally in
harmony with Plato’s. However, they are more prepared than Ammonius
to criticize Aristotle explicitly, and Proclus evidently preferred to concentrate
on Plato when it came to producing written commentary. Ammonius’
greater interest in Aristotle has sometimes been connected with his attitude
to Christianity: I shall say more about this in a moment. It could also be due
to personal preference. Whatever the reason, Philoponus too concentrated
on Aristotle, while at Athens Damascius continued Proclus’ emphasis on
Plato. With the latest Neoplatonists, interests shift again: Olympiodorus,
born some time between 495 and 505 and still teaching at Alexandria in 565,
produced commentaries on Plato’s Alcibiades, Gorgias and Phaedo as well as
on Aristotle’s Categories and Meteorologica, while Simplicius concerned
himself primarily with Aristotle. Olympiodorus’ Gorgias commentary
draws on his notes from Ammonius’ lectures, while his commentaries on
the Alcibiades and the Phaedo take account of Damascius; one of Simplicius’
concerns is to attack the views of Philoponus. By the mid sixth century,
interaction between the schools has already dissolved a short-lived distinction
between Athenian concentration on Plato and Alexandrian emphasis
on Aristotle.
There are no surviving commentaries on Plato by the last Neoplatonic
teachers in Alexandria, Elias, David and Stephanus. Commentary on
Aristotle’s logical works does survive, however; it has also been argued that
the third book of the De anima commentary attributed to Philoponus is in
fact by Stephanus. Elias was probably a pupil of Olympiodorus and
describes himself as teaching Aristotelian philosophy as a preliminary to
Plato. David too was probably a pupil of Olympiodorus. Stephanus must
have been younger, since he was summoned by the emperor Heraclius to
teach at Constantinople in 610. There is no clear evidence for Neoplatonic
teaching at Alexandria after Stephanus, although it is usually assumed that
teaching continued until the Arabs captured the city in 642. 28
So much for differences between Athenian and Alexandrian interests as
commentators. There remains the difficult but important question of attitudes
to Christianity. For Praechter, different attitudes to Christianity at
27 Saffrey (1990). Ammonius, In De interpretatione 253.12–17. Tarán (1978) 120.13–14.
28 On Elias see Westerink (1990) 336–9 (cf. Westerink and Trouillard (1990) xxxi–xxxvi). On David,
Mahé (1990). On Stephanus, Wolska-Conus (1989). For a different view of the relationships between
Elias, David and Stephanus and some arguments for philosophical teaching at Alexandria continuing
into the seventh century, see Roueché (1990). An anonymous chronicle of the last Persian kings records
that Alexandria was betrayed to the Persians in 617 by one Peter who had gone to Alexandria as a youth
to study philosophy (Guidi (1903) 22).
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008