When it is considered that Pythagoras was the father of philosophy,
authentic memoirs of his life cannot fail to be uncommonly interesting
to every lover of wisdom, and particularly to those who reverence the
doctrines of Plato, the most genuine and the best of all his disciples.
And that the following memoirs of Pythagoras by Iamblichus are
authentic, is acknowledged by all the critics, as they are for the most
part obviously derived from sources of very high antiquity; and where
the sources are unknown, there is every reason to believe, from the
great worth and respectability of the biographer, that the information
is perfectly accurate and true.
Of the biographer, indeed, Iamblichus, it is well known to every tyro in
Platonism that he was dignified by all the Platonists that succeeded him
with the epithet of _divine_; and after the encomium passed on him by
the acute Emperor Julian, “_that he was posterior indeed in time, but
not in genius, to Plato_,”[1] all further praise of him would be as
unnecessary, as the defamation of him by certain modern critics is
contemptible and idle. For these _homonculi_ looking solely to his
deficiency in point of style, and not to the magnitude of his intellect,
perceive only his little blemishes, but have not even a glimpse of his
surpassing excellence. They minutely notice the motes that are scattered
in the sunbeams of his genius, but they feel not its invigorating
warmth, they see not its dazzling radiance.
Of this very extraordinary man there is a life extant by Eunapius, the
substance of which I have given in my History of the Restoration of the
Platonic Theology, and to which I refer the English reader. At present I
shall only select from that work the following biographical particulars
respecting our Iamblichus: He was descended of a family equally
illustrious, fortunate, and rich. His country was Chalcis, a city of
Syria, which was called Cœle. He associated with Anatolius who was the
second to Porphyry, but he far excelled him in his attainments, and
ascended to the very summit of philosophy. But after he had been for
some time connected with Anatolius, and most probably found him
insufficient to satisfy the vast desires of his soul, he applied himself
to Porphyry, to whom (says Eunapius) he was in nothing inferior, except
in the structure and power of composition. For his writings were not so
elegant and graceful as those of Porphyry: they were neither agreeable,
nor perspicuous; nor free from impurity of diction. And though they were
not entirely involved in obscurity, and perfectly faulty; yet as Plato
formerly said of Xenocrates, he did not sacrifice to the _Mercurial
Graces_. Hence he is far from detaining the reader with delight, who
merely regards his diction; but will rather avert and dull his
attention, and frustrate his expectation. However, though the surface of
his conceptions is not covered with the flowers of elocution, yet the
depth of them is admirable, and his genius is truly sublime. And
admitting his style to abound in general with those defects, which have
been noticed by the critics, yet it appears to me that the decision of
the anonymous Greek writer respecting his Answer to the Epistle of
Porphyry,[2] is more or less applicable to all his other works. For he
says, ‘that his diction in that Answer is concise and definite, and that
his conceptions are full of efficacy, are elegant, and divine.’[3]
Iamblichus shared in an eminent degree the favor of divinity, on account
of his cultivation of justice; and obtained a numerous multitude of
associates and disciples, who came from all parts of the world, for the
purpose of participating the streams of wisdom, which so plentifully
flowed from the sacred fountain of his wonderful mind. Among these was
Sopater the Syrian,[4] who was most skilful both in speaking and
writing; Eustathius the Cappadocian; and of the Greeks, Theodorus and
Euphrasius. All these were excellent for their virtues and attainments,
as well as many other of his disciples, who were not much inferior to
the former in eloquence; so that it seems wonderful how Iamblichus could
attend to all of them, with such gentleness of manners and benignity of
disposition as he continually displayed.
He performed some few particulars relative to the veneration of divinity
by himself, without his associates and disciples; but was inseparable
from his familiars in most of his operations. He imitated in his diet
the frugal simplicity of the most ancient times; and during his repast,
exhilarated those who were present by his behaviour, and filled them as
with nectar by the sweetness of his discourse.
A celebrated philosopher named Alypius, who was deeply skilled in
dialectic, was contemporary with Iamblichus, but was of such a
diminutive stature, that he exhibited the appearance of a pigmy.
However, his great abilities amply compensated for this trifling defect.
For his body might be said to be consumed into soul; just as the great
Plato says, that divine bodies, unlike those that are mortal, are
situated in souls. Thus also it might be asserted of Alypius, that he
had migrated into soul, and that he was contained and governed by a
nature superior to man. This Alypius had many followers, but his mode of
philosophizing was confined to private conference and disputation,
without committing any of his dogmas to writing. Hence his disciples
gladly applied themselves to Iamblichus, desirous to draw abundantly
from the exuberant streams of his inexhaustible mind. The fame therefore
of each continually increasing, they once accidentally met like two
refulgent stars, and were surrounded by so great a crowd of auditors,
that it resembled some mighty musæum. While Iamblichus on this occasion
waited rather to be interrogated, than to propose a question himself,
Alypius, contrary to the expectation of every one, relinquishing
philosophical discussions, and seeing himself surrounded with a theatre
of men, turned to Iamblichus, and said to him: “Tell me, O philosopher,
is either the rich man unjust, or the heir of the unjust man? For in
this case there is no medium.” But Iamblichus hating the acuteness of
the question, replied: “O most wonderful of all men, this manner of
considering, whether some one excels in externals, is foreign from our
method of philosophizing; since we inquire whether a man abounds in the
virtue which it is proper for him to possess, and which is adapted to a
philosopher.” After he had said this he departed, and at the same time
all the surrounding multitude was immediately dispersed. But Iamblichus,
when he was alone, admired the acuteness of the question, and often
privately resorted to Alypius, whom he very much applauded for his
acumen and sagacity; so that after his decease, he wrote his life. This
Alypius was an Alexandrian by birth, and died in his own country, worn
out with age: and after him Iamblichus,[5] leaving behind him many roots
and fountains of philosophy; which through the cultivation of succeeding
Platonists, produced a fair variety of vigorous branches, and copious
streams.
For an account of the theological writings of Iamblichus, I refer the
reader to my above-mentioned History of the Restoration of the Platonic
Theology; and for accurate critical information concerning all his
works, to the Bibliotheca Græca of Fabricius.
Of the following work, the life of Pythagoras, it is necessary to
observe that the original has been transmitted to us in a very imperfect
state, partly from the numerous verbal errors of the text, partly from
the want of connexion in the things that are narrated, and partly from
many particulars being related in different places, in the very same
words; so that the conjecture of Kuster, one of the German editors of
this work is highly probable, that it had not received the last hand of
Iamblichus, but that others formed this treatise from the confused
materials which they found among his Manuscripts, after his death.
Notwithstanding all its defects, however, it is, as I have before
observed, a most interesting work; and the benefits are inestimable,
which the dissemination of it is calculated to produce. And as two of
the most celebrated critics among the Germans, Kuster and Kiessling,
have given two splendid editions of this work, it is evident they must
have been deeply impressed with a conviction of its value and
importance.
As to the Pythagoric Ethical Fragments, all eulogy of them is
superfluous, when it is considered that, independently of their being
written by very early Pythagoreans, they were some of the sources from
which Aristotle himself derived his consummate knowledge of morality, as
will be at once evident by comparing his Nicomachean Ethics with these
fragments.
With respect to the collection of Pythagoric Sentences in this volume,
it is almost needless to observe that they are incomparably excellent;
and it is deeply to be regretted that the Greek original of the
Sentences of Sextus[6] being lost, the fraudulent Latin version of them
by the Presbyter Ruffinus alone remains. I call it a fraudulent version,
because Ruffinus, wishing to persuade the reader that these Sentences
were written by a bishop of the name of Sixtus, has in many places
perverted and contaminated the meaning of the original. In the
selection, however, which I have made from these Sentences, I have
endeavoured, and I trust not in vain, to give the genuine sense of
Sextus, unmingled with the barbarous and polluted interpolations of
Ruffinus. If the English reader has my translation of the Sentences of
Demophilus, and Mr. Bridgman’s translation of the Golden Sentences of
Democrates, and the Similitudes of Demophilus,[7] he will then be
possessed of all the Pythagoric Sentences that are extant, those alone
of Sextus excepted, which I have not translated, in consequence of the
very impure and spurious state, in which they at present exist.
I deem it also requisite to observe, that the Pythagoric life which is
here delineated, is a specimen of the greatest perfection in virtue and
wisdom, which can be obtained by man in the present state. Hence, it
exhibits piety unadulterated with folly, moral virtue uncontaminated
with vice, science unmingled with sophistry, dignity of mind and manners
unaccompanied with pride, a sublime magnificence in theory, without any
degradation in practice, and a vigor of intellect, which elevates its
possessor to the vision of divinity, and thus deifies while it exalts.
The original of the engraving of the head of Iamblichus in the
title-page, is to be found at the end of a little volume consisting of
Latin translations of Iamblichus De Mysteriis, Proclus On the First
Alcibiades of Plato, &c. &c. &c. 18mo. Genev. 1607. This engraving was
added because it appeared to me to be probable that the original was
copied from an ancient gem. And as it is not impossible that it was, if
it is not genuine, it is at least ornamental.
THE LIFE,
_&c._