Living in “an age of anxiety”, Iamblichus sought out a response to the soteriological cul-de-sac faced by his contemporaries. To this end he grafted onto the solid trunk of a revamped Platonic education the experience that he had gained through his contact with the traditional and “oriental” cults of the Roman World, with Hermeticism, and above all with a recent revelation that went under the name of “The Chaldaean Oracles”. It was in this last that he discovered the figure of the theurgist, which he used as a tool for the construction of a universal theory of grace to challenge the Christian and the Gnostic eschatological positions. Maintaining a proper balance between the liberal anthropology of Plotinus and the elitist anthropology of the Oracles (which distinguished between two types of men - the theurgist and the common herd), Iamblichus opened up the spiritual path to anyone who wished to enter on it and, pushing the exegesis of Chaldaean theology to its limit, he introduced the concept of grace by proxy. Thanks to this descendant of a priestly dynasty, theurgy was no longer the exclusive prerogative of a hereditary caste, but became the heritage of the whole of mankind.

This chapter first presents some preliminary considerations on the relationship between ancient philosophy and religion, and on how peoplw can approach their interpenetration. It presents a historical overview of the changes undergone by Greek philosophy during the and its reception in Rome. Thereafter, the chapter delivers a review of the most striking features of the new philosophical-religious sensitivity, organized around ten themes. The chapter also shows a snapshot of the work of three scholars whose original contribution is based on a largely philosophical approach of the religious traditions of their time: Philo of Alexandria, who thought his native Judaism according to philosophical principles and exegetical methods of Hellenism, Plutarch of Chaeronea, who used Greek philosophy and the new hermetic mysticism to develop his theology of the Isis cult and Numenius of Apamea. The original text of the chapter is in French. Keywords: ancient philosophy; Greek philosophy; long Hellenistic period; Numenius of Apamea; philosophical-religious sensitivity; Philo of Alexandria; Plutarch of Chaeronea; religion

Sons of Hellenism, Fathers of the Church. Emperor Julian, Gregory of Nazianzus, and the vision of Rome. By Susanna Elm. (Transformation of the Classical Heritage, 49.) Pp. xv+554. Berkeley–Los Angeles–London: University of California Press, 2012. £52. 978 0 520 26930 9 - Volume 65 Issue 1

Reviewed by: One God. Pagan Monotheism in the Roman Empire, and: Monotheism between Pagans and Christians in Late Antiquity Polymnia Athanassiadi One God. Pagan Monotheism in the Roman Empire. Edited by Stephen Mitchell and Peter Van Nuffelen. (New York: Cambridge University Press. 2010. Pp. 239. $99.00. ISBN 978-0-521-19416-7.) Monotheism between Pagans and Christians in Late Antiquity. Edited by Stephen Mitchell and Peter Van Nuffelen. [Interdisciplinary Studies in Ancient Culture and Religion, 12.] (Leuven: Peeters. 2010. Pp. vi, 225. €48,00 paperback. ISBN 978-9-042-92242-6.) These two collections of essays are the product of a conference entitled “Pagan Monotheism in the Roman Empire (1–4 c. AD)” that was held at Exeter University in July 2006 and represented a highlight of a triennial research program [End Page 524] on the intellectual background to pagan monotheism. The program was conceived as a response to the volume Pagan Monotheism in Late Antiquity, edited by Michael Frede and the reviewer. The two books differ in conception and format. One God is an elegantly produced hardcover, containing six basically conceptual essays by recognized authorities in the field of religious studies, as well as the contributions of the two editors. Monotheism, on the other hand, is a paperback volume, apparently less carefully edited, which takes the form more of a series of case studies, as the editors themselves note (p. 8). While accepting “pagan monotheism” as a heuristic tool, both books give emphasis to the social and political context of religious praxis and the preeminence of cult and ritual over ideology, although the editors point to a chronological division between the two. Regarding the “Constantinian revolution” as a watershed, they assign to One God papers dealing with the era before the recognition of Christianity as a religio licita and to Monotheism those relating to the period 350–450. It may also be noted that One God concentrates on the Greek East, whereas Monotheism draws to an equal extent on Latin sources. The papers in One God reflect the fundamental distinctions among (a) “soft” (inclusive) pagan and “hard” (exclusive) Judeo-Christian monotheism, (b) numerical and qualitative oneness, and (c) monotheistic thought and polytheistic cult. In a well-structured methodological article, “Pagan Monotheism as a Religious Phenomenon” (pp. 16–33), Peter Van Nuffelen discusses the history and usefulness of such coinages as henotheism, monotheism, and monolatry, together with the neologism megatheism, in the context of the study of Greco-Roman religion. All these terms, he argues, point to the changed way of conceiving and worshiping the godhead in the Roman Empire as from the first century, a change brought about by the interaction between various religious trends under the growing influence of philosophical discourse. Change is equally the central issue in the analysis of Roman religion from the first to the fourth century by John North, “Pagan Ritual and Monotheism” (pp. 34–52), although his emphasis is on social and sociological factors (listed on pp. 42 and 51); not only does North minimize the role of philosophy in the process of mutation, but he dismisses altogether the idea that the tendency toward monotheism is “a necessary condition for the religious transformations we are seeking to analyse” (p. 51). Frede (“The Case for Pagan Monotheism in Greek and Graeco-Roman Antiquity,” pp. 53–81) and Stephen Mitchell (“Further Thoughts on the Cult of Theos Hypsistos,” pp.167–208) remain faithful to the positions adopted in their respective essays in Pagan Monotheism. Emphasizing continuity and intellectuality, Frede brings in evidence from Antisthenes, Chrysippus, and Galen to prove that philosophy is at the heart of ancient religion, which “is not just a matter of cult and ritual” (p. 81). By adducing new epigraphic evidence, Mitchell restates his thesis that the cult of Theos Hypsistos was “in essence and in spirit, if not in the narrowest definition, a form of monotheistic religion” (p. 198). [End Page 525] With reference to St. Augustine’s reception of the Platonic theology, Alfons Fürst (“Monotheism between Cult and Politics: The Themes of the Ancient Debate between Pagan and Christian Monotheism,” pp. 82–99) argues that the Christian apologists “found the decisive difference at the level not of...

The concept of Late Antiquity as an autonomous historical period was launched in the 1970s and has been gaining ground ever since. The chronological, geographical and epistemological expansion of its boundaries goes hand in hand with an optimistic historical vision: the era which was previously known as “an age of anxiety” has become “an age of ambition.” Its hero is the holy man – a new sociological type whose power in this world and the next endows the society from which he emerges with a remarkable dynamism. Born of a reaction to the historiographical model of crisis and decline, which corresponds to the tripartite periodisation “Antiquity, Middle Ages, Modern Times”, the postmodern concept of a long, autonomous, dynamic and multi-cultural Late Antiquity is now in its turn the subject of a reaction. The new millennium has seen the beginnings of a return to the study of the political, administrative and economic structures of the end of the ancient world, and, perhaps inevitably, to a more traditional, ...

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.

The men of the Antonine era shared with us a keen interest in divination, which they expressed in a variety of complementary or apparently contradictory ways: in polemic and dispassionate research, but more obviously in the act of reviving their ancient prophetic shrines and of establishing new oracles. If the rage that the vaticinating demons inspired in Oenomaus of Gadara and in Lucian is sufficient evidence of the rationalist's reaction to a mounting social and intellectual trend, the scholarly achievement of Artemidorus of Daldis at the instigation of Apollo himself exemplifies in more positive fashion the involvement of the age with prophetic lore. So does the incredible success of the Pythagorean Alexander's oracular establishment on the inhospitable shores of the Black Sea, and the personality of Aelius Aristides, that professional valetudinarian whose night-diaries dictated by Asclepius covered more than three hundred thousand lines. It was in precisely this world that the Delphic oracle underwent a remarkable renaissance under the auspices of a Platonist philosopher, and that an emperor commended the publication by a senator of a work about the dreams which foretold his ascent to the throne.