From the point of view of the history of philosophy, the book's notable strength lies in its provision of novel, and in certain instances significant, interpretations of select passages from the Enneads and Plotinus's philosophical concepts, which are studied in the light of their historical context: this is especially the case with the analyses of Plotinus's political philosophy and the emphasis on his involvement with the imperial court.

Philosophy in Review

The basic opposition in Altman's impressive study is between 'genuine Platonism' and Plotinus' 'Imperial Platonism.' Issuing from his voluminous work on the dialogues, Altman's genuine Platonism is dualistic and demands that the philosopher engage with the messy reality of political life. Imperial Platonism, in contrast, assimilates the sensible to the intelligible, combining the temptations of 'flight' and 'assimilation to god' with the potentially tyrannical ideal of reforming the political realm in light of the intelligible. Given this opposition between Plato and Plotinus, Altman documents biases that shape the peculiar sympathy Plotinus scholars show towards him, with some even considering him to be the ultimate exponent of Platonism and the most reliable exegete of Plato: an imposition of Imperial Platonism on Plato through a focus on the Timaeus at the expense of Republic; an editorial and interpretive tendency to apologise for Plotinus' exegetical infelicities and sleights of hand; and a hostility to research that finds Gnostic influences on Plotinus. Altman's grasp of the history of Plotinian scholarship is remarkable, and his insight into its major figures is invaluable. He supports his points by closely argued and persuasive evidence. His overall argument is bold, and the controversy it will undoubtedly provoke is its highest recommendation.

Gregory MacIsaac, Carleton University

This book is written with wisdom, vigour, learning, and courage. Altman has the courage to distinguish Neoplatonism from a more authentic Platonism, which did not show the same political supinity; the courage to say that Gnostic dualism is neither a myth nor an aberration and exploits an existing strain in Greek philosophy; the courage to set Plotinus between Apollonius of Tyana and Julian the Apostate, who are often dismissed as amateurs in philosophy because they are so openly political. In short, this is a book about what ought to matter in the history of ideas, and surely the most profound interrogation of conventional histories of the Platonic tradition since Lloyd Gerson's Aristotle and other Platonists.

Mark Edwards, Christ Church, Oxford University

Erudite and original – like the numerous other works Altman has published –, this book is overtly polemical, challenging long-established convictions and practices of Plotinian and Neoplatonic scholarship. The claims are bold and the criticisms are severe, as Altman does not approach his subject with the indulgence and sympathy that not few historians of philosophy use to have for it. Either to dismiss Altman's claims and criticisms or to re-evaluate our understanding of Plotinus and his followers, this book will prove to be obligatory reading for any student of the Platonic tradition.

José C. Baracat, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil