ABSTRACT
It has long been believed that Neoplatonist philosophers had no interest in political theory or philosophy. On the contrary, their lack of concern with worldly a airs, their striving to transcend material existence must mean, it has been thought, that they can have no place in their philosophy for political matters. In view of this common opinion, it might be better to begin with some preliminary distinctions which, although obvious enough, need to be kept clearly in mind, if we are to avoid misunderstandings and confusions which typically arise in connection with the very idea of a political theory in Neoplatonism. We need to distinguish rst between political theory and political involvement. One may be interested in political questions on the theoretical level, without getting involved in political action (an example of this would be Plato, for part of his life), just as one can be politically active without having any interest in the theoretical issues at stake (no examples needed here!): to have a political theory is not necessarily to be a politician (and vice versa). However, we can expect a political theory to include re ection on the nature of political action and on the conditions in which this action may take place. is chapter will be concerned exclusively with political theory as found in Neoplatonist philosophers, not with the separate question as to the extent to which these philosophers may or may not have been active in politics. A further source of confusion is the expression “political philosophy”, which today can be taken to mean something quite di erent from what it meant in ancient philosophy. is chapter will be concerned exclusively with political philosophy as it was conceived in antiquity: we will survey what the concept meant for Neoplatonist philosophers, how political philosophy was thought to relate to other parts of philosophy, and what its objects and nality were in relation to philosophy as a whole.
