132 | CHAPTER 5
in particular, is concentrated in them.”^17 An eminent twentieth- century stu-
dent of Plotinus added that
his originality showed itself, not in the discovery of a new philosophi-
cal method, or in the affirmation of a new attitude towards life, but in
the constructive power which, starting from certain scattered hints in
Plato, the most unsystematic of creators, and certain loose ends in Ar-
istotle, the most inconclusive of systematisers, and utilising whatever
seemed valuable in Stoicism and the later Academy, evolved a scheme
of Reality at once more comprehensive and more closely knit than any-
thing which had yet been attempted.^18Only we should not underestimate his pupil Porphyry’s contribution to the
task of reconciling, as Gibbon put it, “the strong and subtle sense of Aristotle
with the devout contemplation and sublime fancy of Plato.”^19 The assump-
tion of Aristotle’s essential compatibility, or “harmony,” with Plato, despite
his protestations to the contrary, was to become an article of faith, a charac-
teristic expression of philosophy’s exegetical phase. It is also one of the things
that distinguish late Greek understanding of the philosophical tradition
from the narrative espoused by most modern scholarship.^20
Unacceptably for Platonists, Aristotle depicted God as the mover of the
whole world, but not as its creator and sustainer.^21 He also identified God/
the First Principle with Intellect, which is complex, whereas God must be
simple.^22 But since Plato was the main authority on the world known by in-
tellect, while Aristotle was seen as concentrating on the world as known
through the senses,^23 it was possible to forgive Aristotle his misunderstand-
ings of metaphysics, and go on treating him as a Platonist at heart. In the
words of Simplicius again, Aristotle
always refuses to deviate from nature; on the contrary, he considers
even things which are above nature according to their relation to na-
ture, just as, by contrast, the divine Plato... examines even natural
things insofar as they participate in the things above nature.^2417 Porphyry, Life of Plotinus [5:12] 14.
18 E. R. Dodds, Select passages illustrating Neoplatonism (London 1923) 10.
19 Gibbon 39: 2.550; cf. G. E. Karamanolis, Plato and Aristotle in agreement? (Oxford 2006)
216–330.
20 R. Sorabji, The philosophy of the commentators, 200–600 AD (London 2004) 3.37–40; L. P. Ger-
son, Aristotle and other Platonists (Ithaca, N.y. 2005) 1–16.
21 R. Sorabji, “Infinite power impressed: The transformation of Aristotle’s physics and theolog y,” in
id. (ed.), Aristotle transformed [5:5] 181–98.
22 Plotinus [ed. P. Henry and H.- R. Schwyzer (editio minor Oxford 1964–83); tr. A. H. Arm-
strong (London 1966–88)] 5.1.9; Gerson, Aristotle and other Platonists [5:20] 10–11.
23 Damascius, Life of Isidore [2:112] 36 Zintzen, 34D Athanassiadi.
24 Simplicius, Commentary on Aristotle’s Categories [5:16] 6.27–30.