Adamson, P. (2007). ‘Porphyrius Arabus on Nature and Art: 463F Smith in Context’. In: Karamanolis, G. & Sheppard, A. (eds.) Studies on Porphyry. London: 141–63.Google Scholar

Adamson, P., Baltussen, H. & Stone, M.W.F. (eds.) (2004). Philosophy, Science and Exegesis in Greek, Arabic and Latin Commentaries, Vol. I. London.Google Scholar

Aerts, S. (2019). ‘Historical Approaches to Epistemic Authority: The Case of Neoplatonism’. Journal of the History of Ideas 80: 343–63.Google Scholar

Aerts, S. & Opsomer, J. (2017). ‘Teksten bekleed met autoriteit: Een model voor de analyse van epistemische autoriteit in commentaartradities’. Tijdschrift voor Filosofie 79: 277–94.Google Scholar

Algra, K. (2001). ‘Comments or Commentary? Zeno of Citium and Hesiod’s Theogonia’. Mnemosyne 54: 562–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Algra, K. (2017). ‘The Academic Origins of Stoic Cosmo-Theology and the Physics of Antiochus of Ascalon – Some Notes on the Evidence’. In: Liebersohn, Y. & Ludlam, I. (eds.) For a Skeptical Peripatetic: Festschrift in Honour of John Glucker. Sankt Augustin: 158–76.Google Scholar

Algra, K. (2018). ‘Arius Didymus as a Doxographer of Stoicism: Some Observations’. In: Mansfeld, J. & Runia, D.T. (eds.) Aëtiana IV: Papers of the Melbourne Colloquium on Ancient Doxography. Leiden: 53–102.Google Scholar

Algra, K., Barnes, J., Mansfeld, J. & Schofield, M. (eds.) (1999). The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Alline, H. (1915). Histoire du texte de Platon. Paris.Google Scholar

Annas, J. (1999). Platonic Ethics Old and New. Ithaca.Google Scholar

Armstrong, A.H. (ed.) (1980). Plotinus, Vol. III. Cambridge, MA & London.Google Scholar

Armstrong, A.H. (ed.) (1988). Plotinus, Vol. VI. Cambridge, MA & London.Google Scholar

Arnott, W.G. (ed.) (1996). Alexis: The Fragments. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Arruzza, C. (2011). ‘Passive Potentiality in the Physical Realm: Plotinus’ Critique of Aristotle in Enneads II 5 [25]’. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 93: 24–57.Google Scholar

Arruzza, C. (ed.) (2015). Plotinus. Ennead II.5: On What Is Potentially and What Actually. Las Vegas, Zurich & Athens.Google Scholar

Athanassiadi, P. (2002). ‘The Creation of Orthodoxy in Neoplatonism’. In: Clark, G. & Rajak, T. (eds.) Philosophy and Power in the Graeco-Roman World. Oxford: 271–91.Google Scholar

Athanassiadi, P. (2006). La lutte pour l’orthodoxie dans le platonisme tardif: de Numénius à Damascius. Paris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Athanassiadi, P. (2018). ‘Numenius: Portrait of a Platonicus’. In: Tarrant, et al. 2018: 183–205.Google Scholar

Babbitt, F.C. (ed.) (1936). Plutarch’s Moralia, Vol. V. Cambridge, MA & London.Google Scholar

Babut, D. (1969). Plutarque et le Stoïcisme. Paris.Google Scholar

Babut, D. (1994). ‘Du scepticisme au dépassement de la raison: philosophie et foi religieuse chez Plutarque’. In: Parerga. Choix d’articles de D. Babut (1974–1994). Lyon: 549–81.Google Scholar

Baghdassarian, F. & Guyomarc’h, G. (eds.) (2017). Réceptions de la théologie aristotélicienne. D’Aristote à Michel d'Ephèse. Leuven.Google Scholar

Baldassarri, M. (1993). ‘Ein kleiner Traktat Plutarchs über stoische Logik’. In: Döring, K. & Ebert, T. (eds.) Dialektiker und Stoiker. Zur Logik der Stoa und ihrer Vorläufer. Stuttgart: 33–45.Google Scholar

Baltes, M. (ed.) (1972). Timaios Lokros. Über die Natur des Kosmos und der Seele. Leiden.Google Scholar

Baltussen, H. (2008). Philosophy and Exegesis in Simplicius. The Methodology of a Commentator. London.Google Scholar

Baltzly, D. & Share, M. (eds.) (2018). Hermias. On Plato’s Phaedrus 227A–245E. London.Google Scholar

Baltzly, D. & Tarrant, H. (eds.) (2007). Proclus. Commentary on Plato’s Timaeus. Vol. I: Book 1. Proclus on the Socratic State and Atlantis. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Barnes, J. (ed.) (1984). The Complete Works of Aristotle. The Revised Oxford Translation, Vol. I. Princeton.Google Scholar

Barnes, J. (1989). ‘Antiochus of Ascalon’. In: Griffin, & Barnes, 1989: 51–96.Google Scholar

Bastianini, G. & Sedley, D. (1995). Commentarium in Platonis Theaetetum. In: Corpus dei papiri filosofici greci e latini III. Florence: 227–562.Google Scholar

Beierwaltes, W. (1979). Proklos. Grundzüge seiner Metaphysik. Frankfurt (1st ed. 1965).Google Scholar

Berman, K. & Losada, L.A. (1975). ‘The Mysterious E at Delphi’. Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 17: 115–17.Google Scholar

Berryman, S. (2003). ‘Ancient Automata and Mechanical Explanation’. Phronesis 48: 344–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berryman, S. (2009). The Mechanical Hypothesis in Ancient Greek Natural Philosophy. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Berti, E. (2012). Sumphilosophein: la vita nell’Accademia di Platone. Rome & Bari.Google Scholar

Birt, T. (1907). Der Buchrolle in der Kunst. Leipzig.Google Scholar

Blank, D. (2012). ‘Varro and Antiochus’. In: Sedley, 2012a: 251–89.Google Scholar

Blondell, R. (2002). The Play of Character in Plato’s Dialogues. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Bodnár, I., Chase, M. & Share, M. (eds.) (2012). Simplicius. On Aristotle Physics 8.1–5. London.Google Scholar

Bonazzi, M. (2003). Academici e Platonici. Il dibattito antico sullo scetticismo di Platone. Milan.Google Scholar

Bonazzi, M. (2004). ‘Un lettore antico della Repubblica, Numenio di Apamea’. Méthexis 17: 71–84.Google Scholar

Bonazzi, M. (2005). ‘Eudoro di Alessandria alle origini del Platonismo Imperiale’. In Bonazzi, M. & Celluprica, V. (eds.) L’eredità Platonica. Studi sul Platonismo da Arcesilao a Proclo. Naples: 115–60.Google Scholar

Bonazzi, M. (2006). ‘Continuité et rupture entre l’Académie et le platonisme’. Études Platoniciennes 3: 231–44.Google Scholar

Bonazzi, M. (2007). ‘Eudorus’ Psychology and Stoic Ethics’. In: Bonazzi, & Helmig, 2007: 109–32.Google Scholar

Bonazzi, M. (2008). ‘L’offerta di Plutarco. Teologia e filosofia nel De E apud Delphos (capitoli 1–2)’. Philologus 152: 205–11.Google Scholar

Bonazzi, M. (2012). ‘Antiochus and Platonism’. In: Sedley, 2012a: 307–33.Google Scholar

Bonazzi, M. (2013). ‘Pythagoreanising Aristotle: Eudorus and the Systematisation of Platonism’. In: Schofield, 2013: 160–86.Google Scholar

Bonazzi, M. (2015). À la Recherche des Idées. Platonisme et Philosophie Hellénistique d’Antiochus à Plotin. Paris.Google Scholar

Bonazzi, M. (2017–2018). ‘Le Bien selon Numénius et la République de Platon’. Chôra 15–16: 127–38.Google Scholar

Bonazzi, M. (2018). ‘Héraclite, l’Académie et le platonisme: Une confrontation entre Cicéron et Plutarque’. In: Franchet, S. & d’Espèrey-Lévy, C. (eds.) Les présocratiques à Rome. Paris: 129–42.Google Scholar

Bonazzi, M. & Helmig, Ch. (eds.) (2007). Platonic Stoicism, Stoic Platonism. The Dialogue between Platonism and Stoicism in Antiquity. Leuven.Google Scholar

Bonazzi, M. & Opsomer, J. (eds.) (2009). The Origins of the Platonic System. Platonisms of the Early Empire and their Philosophical Contexts. Leuven.Google Scholar

Bonitz, H. (1870). Index Aristotelicus. Berlin.Google Scholar

Boulogne, J., Broze, M. & Couloubaritsis, L. (eds.) (2006). Les Platonismes des premiers siècles de notre ère. Plutarque, E de Delphes. Brussels.Google Scholar

Boys-Stones, G. (2001). Post-Hellenistic Philosophy. A Study of Its Development from the Stoics to Origen. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Boys-Stones, G. (2007). ‘“Middle” Platonists on Fate and Human Autonomy’. In: Sharples, & Sorabji, 2007: Vol. II, 431–47.Google Scholar

Boys-Stones, G. (2011). ‘Time, Creation and the Mind of God: The Afterlife of a Platonist Theory in Origen’. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 40: 319–37.Google Scholar

Boys-Stones, G. (2012). ‘Antiochus’ Metaphysics’. In Sedley, 2012a: 220–6.Google Scholar

Boys-Stones, G. (2016). ‘Are We Nearly There Yet? Eudorus on Aristotle’s Categories’. In: Engberg-Pedersen, T. (ed.) From Stoicism to Platonism. The Development of Philosophy 100 bce–100 ce. Cambridge: 67–79.Google Scholar

Boys-Stones, G. (2018a). Platonist Philosophy 80 bc to 250 ad. A Study and Collection of Sources in Translation. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Boys-Stones, G. (2018b). ‘Numenius on Intellect, Soul, and the Authority of Plato’. In: Bryan, et al. 2018: 184–201.Google Scholar

Brisson, L. (1974). Le Même et l’Autre dans la structure ontologique du Timée. Sankt Augustin.Google Scholar

Brittain, Ch. (2001). Philo of Larissa. The Last Academic Sceptic. Oxford.Google Scholar

Brittain, Ch. (2005). ‘Common Sense: Concepts, Definitions and Meaning in and out of Stoa’. In: Frede, & Inwood, 2005: 164–209.Google Scholar

Brittain, Ch. (2012). ‘Antiochus’ Epistemology’. In: Sedley, 2012a: 104–30.Google Scholar

Brittain, Ch. & Palmer, J. (2001). ‘The New Academy’s Appeal to the Presocratics’. Phronesis 46: 38–72.Google Scholar

Broadie, S. (2007). ‘Why No Platonistic Forms of Artefacts?’ In: Scott, D. (ed.) Maieusis. Essays in Ancient Philosophy in Honour of Myles Burnyeat. Oxford: 232–53.Google Scholar

Brouillette, X. & Giavatto, A. (eds.) (2010). Les dialogues Platoniciens chez Plutarque. Stratégies et méthodes exégétiques. Leuven.Google Scholar

Bryan, J., Wardy, R. & Warren, J. (eds.) (2018). Authors and Authorities in Ancient Philosophy. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Burkert, W. (1961). ‘Hellenistische Pseudopythagorica’. Philologus 105: 16–43, 226–46.Google Scholar

Burkert, W. (1971). ‘Zur geistesgeschichtlichen Einordnung einiger Pseudopythagorica’. In: von Fritz, K. (ed.) Pseudepigrapha I. Vandœuvres & Geneva: 25–55.Google Scholar

Burkert, W. (1972). Lore and Science in Ancient Pythagoreanism. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

Burnyeat, M. (1997). ‘Antipater and Self-Refutation: Elusive Arguments in Cicero’s Academica’. In: Inwood & Mansfeld 1997: 277–310.Google Scholar

Burnyeat, M. (2005). ‘Archytas and Optics’. Science in Context 18: 35–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Calabi, F. (2017). ‘L’agricoltura divina in Filone di Alessandria e in Numenio’. Études platoniciennes [online] 13.Google Scholar

Carlini, A. (1972). Studi sulla tradizione antica e medievale del Fedone. Rome.Google Scholar

Caruso, A. (2013). Akademia: Archeologia di una scuola filosofica ad Atene da Platone a Proclo (387 a.C.–485 d.C.). Studi di Archeologia e di Topografia di Atene e dell’Attica 6. Athens & Paestum.Google Scholar

Caruso, A. (2014). ‘Il “giardino di Teofrasto”. Inquadramento topografico della scuola peripatetica di Atene tra il IV e il III sec. a.C.’. In: Caliò, L. & Parisi, V. (eds.) Gli Ateniesi e il loro modello di città. Rome: 197–216.Google Scholar

Caston, V. (1999). ‘Something and Nothing: The Stoics on Concepts and Universals’. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 17: 145–213.Google Scholar

Catana, L. (2013). ‘The Origin of the Division Between Middle Platonism and Neoplatonism’. Apeiron 46: 166–200.Google Scholar

Centrone, B. (ed.) (1990). Pseudopythagorica ethica. I trattati morali di Archita, Metopo, Teage, Eurifamo. Introduzione, edizione, traduzione e commento. Naples.Google Scholar

Centrone, B. (ed.) (1992). ‘L' VIII libro delle Vite di Diogene Laerzio’. In: Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt, Band II.36.6. Berlin & New York: 4183–217.Google Scholar

Centrone, B. (ed.) (2000a). ‘Che cosa significa essere pitagorico in età imperiale. Per una riconsiderazione della categoria storiografica di neopitagorismo’. In: Brancacci, A. (ed.) La filosofia in età imperiale. Naples: 139–68.Google Scholar

Centrone, B. (ed.) (2000b). ‘La letteratura pseudopitagorica. Origini, diffusione, finalità’. In: Cerri, G. (ed.) La letteratura pseudepigrafa antica. AION, sez. filol.-lett. 22: 429–52.Google Scholar

Centrone, B. (ed.) (2000c). ‘Platonism and Pythagoreanism in the Early Empire’. In: Rowe, Ch. & Schofield, M. (eds.) The Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Political Thought. Cambridge: 559–84.Google Scholar

Centrone, B. (ed.) (2005). ‘Myia’. In: Goulet, R. (ed.) Dictionnaire des Philosophes Antiques, Vol. IV. Paris: 573–4.Google Scholar

Centrone, B. (ed.) (2014). ‘The Pseudo-Pythagorean Writings’. In: Huffman, 2014b: 315–40.Google Scholar

Chase, M. (2012). ‘Porphyre de Tyr (P263): Commentaires sur des traités aristotéliciens’. In: Goulet, R. (ed.) Dictionnaire des philosophes antiques, Vol. Vb. Paris: 1350–7.Google Scholar

Cherniss, H. (1945). The Riddle of the Early Academy. Berkeley.Google Scholar

Chiaradonna, R. (2009). ‘Autour d’Eudore: les debuts de l’exégèse des Catégories dans le Moyen Platonisme’. In Bonazzi, & Opsomer, 2009: 89–112.Google Scholar

Chiaradonna, R. (2011). ‘Interpretazione filosofica e ricezione del corpus: Il caso di Aristotele (100 a.C.–200 d.C.)’. Quaestio 11: 83–114.Google Scholar

Chiaradonna, R. (2013). ‘Platonist Approaches to Aristotle: From Antiochus of Ascalon to Eudorus of Alexandria (and beyond)’. In: Schofield, 2013: 28–52.Google Scholar

Chiaradonna, R. (2014a). ‘Plotinus’ Metaphorical Reading of the Timaeus: Soul, Mathematics, Providence’. In: d’Hoine, P. & Van Riel, G. (eds.) Fate, Providence and Moral Responsibility in Ancient, Medieval and Early Modern Thought. Studies in Honour of Carlos Steel. Leuven: 187–210.Google Scholar

Chiaradonna, R. (2014b). ‘Substance’. In: Remes, & Slaveva-Griffin, 2014b: 216–30.Google Scholar

Chiaradonna, R. (2016). ‘Porphyry and the Aristotelian Tradition’. In: Falcon, A. (ed.) The Brill’s Companion to the Reception of Aristotle in Antiquity. Leiden & Boston: 321–40.Google Scholar

Chiaradonna, R. (2017). ‘Théologie et époptique aristotéliciennes dans le médioplatonisme: La réception de Métaphysique Λ’. In: Baghdassarian, & Guyomarc’h, 2017: 143–57.Google Scholar

Chiaradonna, R. & Rashed, M. (eds.) (2020). Boéthos de Sidon: Exégète d’Aristote et philosophe. Berlin.Google Scholar

Chlup, R. (2012). Proclus. An Introduction. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Colvin, M. (2005). ‘Heraclitus and Material Flux in Stoic Psychology’. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 28: 257–72.Google Scholar

Cornford, F.M. (1939). Plato and Parmenides. London.Google Scholar

Corssen, P. (1912). ‘Die Sprengung des pythagoreischen Bundes’. Philologus 71: 332–52.Google Scholar

Corti, A. (2014). L’Adversus Colotem di Plutarco. Storia di una polemica filosofica. Leuven.Google Scholar

Dancy, R. (1999). ‘The Categories of Being in Plato’s Sophist 255c–e’. Ancient Philosophy 19: 45–72.Google Scholar

Dancy, R. (2003). ‘Xenocrates’. In: The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/xenocrates/.Google Scholar

D’Ancona, C. & Luna, C. (2000). ‘La doctrine des principes: Syrianus comme source textuelle et doctrinale de Proclus’. In: Segonds, A.Ph. & Steel, C. (eds.) Proclus et la théologie platonicienne. Actes du Colloque International de Louvain (13–16 mai 1998). Leuven & Paris: 189–278.Google Scholar

de Haas, F.A.J. & Fleet, B. (eds.) (2001). Simplicius. On Aristotle Categories 5–6. London.Google Scholar

Denyer, N. (ed.) (2001). Plato. Alcibiades. Cambridge.Google Scholar

des Places, É. (ed.) (1973). Numénius. Fragments. Paris.Google Scholar

des Places, É. (ed.) (1977). Atticus. Fragments. Paris.Google Scholar

d’Hoine, P. (2006). ‘Proclus and Syrianus on Ideas of Artefacts. A Test Case for Neoplatonic Hermeneutics’. In: Perkams, & Piccione, 2006: 279–302.Google Scholar

d’Hoine, P., & Martijn, M. (eds.) (2016). All from One. A Guide to Proclus. Oxford.Google Scholar

Dillon, J.M. (ed.) (1973). Iamblichi Chalcidensis in Platonis dialogos commentariorum fragmenta. Leiden.Google Scholar

Dillon, J.M. (ed.) (1977). The Middle Platonists: 80 BC to AD 220. Ithaca & London (rev. ed. 1996).Google Scholar

Dillon, J.M. (ed.) (1991). The Golden Chain: Studies in the Development of Platonism and Christianity. London.Google Scholar

Dillon, J.M. (ed.) (1993). Alcinous: The Handbook of Platonism. Oxford.Google Scholar

Dillon, J.M. (ed.) (2003). The Heirs of Plato. Oxford.Google Scholar

Dillon, J.M. (ed.) (2007). ‘The Origins of Platonists’ Dogmatism’. ΣΧΟΛΗ 1: 25–37.Google Scholar

Dillon, J.M. (ed.) (2014). ‘Pythagoreanism in the Academic Tradition’. In: Huffman, 2014b: 250–73.Google Scholar

Dodds, E.R. (ed.) (1963). Proclus. The Elements of Theology. Oxford.Google Scholar

Donini, P. (1974). Tre studi sull’aristotelismo nel II secolo d.C. Turin.Google Scholar

Donini, P. (1982). Le scuole, l’anima, l’impero: la filosofia antica da Antioco a Plotino. Turin.Google Scholar

Donini, P. (1990). ‘Medioplatonismo e filosofi medioplatonici. Una raccolta di studi’. Elenchos 11: 79–93 = Donini 2011: 283–96.Google Scholar

Donini, P. (1992). ‘Plutarco e i metodi dell’esegesi filosofica’. In: Gallo, I. & Laurenti, R. (eds.) I moralia di Plutarco tra filologia e filosofia. Naples: 79–96.Google Scholar

Donini, P. (1999). ‘Platone e Aristotele nella tradizione pitagorica secondo Plutarco’. In: Pérez Jiménez, A., García López, J., Aguilar, R. M^a (eds.) Plutarco, Platón y Aristóteles. Madrid: 9–24 = Donini 2011: 359–73.Google Scholar

Donini, P. (2002). ‘L’eredità academica e i fondamenti del platonismo in Plutarco’. In: Barbanti, M., Giardina, G. & Manganaro, P. (eds.) Henosis kai philia: Unione e amicizia. Omaggio a Francesco Romano. Catania: 247–73 = Donini 2011: 375–402.Google Scholar

Donini, P. (2003). ‘Socrate pitagorico e medioplatonico’. Elenchos 24: 333–59.Google Scholar

Donini, P. (2011). Commentary and Tradition. Aristotelianism, Platonism and Post-Hellenistic Philosophy, ed. Bonazzi, M.. Berlin & New York.Google Scholar

Donini, P. (2012). ‘Review of Sedley 2012a’. Méthexis 25: 151–63.Google Scholar

Donini, P. (ed.) (2017). Plutarco. Il demone di Socrate. Rome.Google Scholar

Dorandi, T. (1982). ‘Filodemo. Gli Stoici (PHerc. 135 e 339)’. Cronache Ercolanesi 12: 91–133.Google Scholar

Dorandi, T. (2016). ‘Potamone di Alessandria’. Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 199: 33–5.Google Scholar

Dörrie, H. & Baltes, M. (1993). Der Platonismus in der Antike III: Der Platonismus im 2. und 3. Jahrhundert nach Christus. Bausteine 73–100. Stuttgart & Bad-Cannstatt.Google Scholar

Dörrie, H. & Baltes, M. (1996). Der Platonismus in der Antike IV: Die philosophische Lehre des Platonismus. Einige grundlegende Axiome / Platonische Physik (im antiken Verständnis) I. Bausteine 101–24. Stuttgart & Bad Cannstatt.Google Scholar

Erler, M. (1992). ‘Orthodoxie und Anpassung: Philodem, ein Panaïtios des Kepos?’ Museum Helveticum 49: 171–200.Google Scholar

Erler, M. (2008). ‘Die helfende Hand Gottes. Augustins Gnadenlehre im Kontext des kaiserzeitlichen Platonismus’. In: Fuhrer, Th. (ed.) Die christlich-philosophischen Diskurse der Spätantike: Texte, Personen, Institutionen. Stuttgart: 189–204.Google Scholar

Erler, M. (2018). ‘“Mulier tam imperiosae auctoritatis” (Boeth., Cons. 1,1,13): Auctoritas und philosophia in römischer und griechischer Philosophie’. In: Müller, J. & Rode, Ch. (eds.) Freiheit und Geschichte: Festschrift für Theo Kobusch zum 70. Geburtstag. Münster: 39–57. English version: ‘“Mulier tam imperiosae auctoritatis” (Boeth., Cons. 1.1.13): On the relationship between auctoritas and philosophia in Greek and Roman philosophy’. Politeia. International Interdisciplinary Philosophical Review 1 (2019): 195–210.Google Scholar

Falcon, A. (2013). ‘Aristotelianism in the I century BC. Xenarchus of Seleucia’. In: Schofield, 2013: 78–94.Google Scholar

Ferrari, F. (1995). Dio, idee e materia. La struttura del cosmos in Plutarco di Cheronea. Naples.Google Scholar

Ferrari, F. (2001). ‘Struttura e funzione dell’esegesi testuale nel medioplatonismo: il caso del Timeo’. Athenaeum 89: 525–74.Google Scholar

Ferrari, F. (2010). ‘La costruzione del Platonismo nel de E apud Delphos di Plutarco’. Athenaeum 98: 71–87. French version: ‘La construction du Platonisme dans le de E apud Delphos de Plutarque’. In: Brouillette & Giavatto 2010: 47–62.Google Scholar

Ferrari, F. (2014). ‘Gott als Vater und Schöpfer. Zur Rezeption von Timaios 28c3–5 bei einigen Platonikern’. In Albrecht, F. & Feldmeier, R. (eds.) The Divine Father: Religious and Philosophical Concepts of Divine Parenthood in Antiquity. Leiden & Boston: 57–69.Google Scholar

Ferrari, F. (2018). ‘Harpokration von Argos’. In: Riedweg, Ch., Horn, Ch. & Wyrwa, D. (eds.) Philosophie der Kaiserzeit und der Spätantike, Band 5-1 von Grundriss der Geschichte der Philosophie, begründet von F. Ueberweg, völlig neu bearbeitete Ausgabe von H. Holzhey. Basel: 601–4.Google Scholar

Festa, N. (ed.) (1935). I frammenti degli Stoici antichi, Vol. II: Aristone, Apollofane, Erillo, Dionigi di Eraclea, Perseo, Cleante, Sfero. Bari.Google Scholar

Festugière, A.J. (1954). La Révélation d'Hermès Trismégiste IV. Le dieu inconnu et la gnose. Paris.Google Scholar

Flamand, J.-M. (1992). ‘Deus otiosus, Recherches lexicales pour servir à la critique religieuse d’Épicure’. In: ΣΟΦΙΗΣ ΜΑΙΗΤΟΡΕΣ, Chercheurs de Sagesse, Hommage à Jean Pépin. Paris: 147–66.Google Scholar

Fleischer, K. (2015). ‘Der Stoiker Mnesarch als Lehrer des Antiochos im Index Academicorum’. Mnemosyne 68: 413–23.Google Scholar

Fleischer, K. (2016). ‘New Readings in Philodemus’ Historia Academicorum: Dio of Alexandria (PHerc 1021, col. XXXV 17–19)’. In: Derda, T. et al. (eds.) Proceedings of the 27th Congress of Papyrology. Warsaw: 459–70.Google Scholar

Frede, D. (2018). ‘A Superannuated Student: Aristotle and Authority in the Academy’. In: Bryan et al. 2018: 78–101.Google Scholar

Frede, D., & Inwood, B. (eds.) (2005). Language and Learning. Philosophy of Language in the Hellenistic Age. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Frede, M. (1987). ‘Numenius’. In: Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt, Band II.36.2. Berlin & New York: 1034–75.Google Scholar

Frede, M. (1999). ‘Epilogue’. In: Algra, et al. 1999: 771–97.Google Scholar

Fronterotta, F. (ed.) (2013). Eraclito. Frammenti. Milan.Google Scholar

Gaiser, K. (1980). Das Philosophenmosaik in Neapel. Eine Darstellung der platonischen Akademie. Abhandlungen der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil.-hist. Klasse, Heidelberg.Google Scholar

Gallo, I. (1981). Teatro ellenistico minore. Rome.Google Scholar

Gerson, L. (2005). Aristotle and Other Platonists. Ithaca & London.Google Scholar

Gerson, L. (ed.) (2013). The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Gertz, S. (2010). ‘Do Plato and Aristotle Agree on Self-Motion in Souls?’ In: Finamore, J.F. & Berchman, R.M. (eds.) Conversations Platonic and Neoplatonic: Intellect, Soul, and Nature. Sankt Augustin: 73–85.Google Scholar

Gill, M.L. (1994). ‘Aristotle on Self-Motion’. In: Gill, & Lennox, 1994: 15–34.Google Scholar

Gill, M.L. & Lennox, J.G. (1994). Self-motion: From Aristotle to Newton. Princeton.Google Scholar

Gioè, A. (ed.) (2002). Filosofi medioplatonici del II secolo d.C. Testimonianze e frammenti: Gaio, Albino, Lucio, Nicostrato, Tauro, Severo, Arpocrazione. Naples.Google Scholar

Glucker, J. (1978). Antiochus and the Late Academy. Göttingen.Google Scholar

Golitsis, P. (2015). ‘On Simplicius’ Life and Works: A Response to Hadot’. Aestimatio 12: 56–82.Google Scholar

Golitsis, P. (2018). ‘Simplicius, Syrianus and the Harmony of Ancient Philosophers’. In: Strobel, B. (ed.) Die Kunst der philosophischen Exegese bei den spätantiken Platon- und Aristoteles-Kommentatoren. Akten der Tagung der Karl und Gertrud Abel-Stiftung vom 4. bis 6. Oktober 2012 in Trier. Berlin & New York: 69–99.Google Scholar

Görler, W. (1990). ‘Antiochos von Askalon über die “Alten” und über Die Stoa’. In: Steinmetz, P. (ed.) Beiträge zur hellenistischen Literatur und ihrer Rezeption in Rom. Stuttgart: 123–39 = Görler 2004: 87–104.Google Scholar

Görler, W. (1997). ‘Cicero’s Philosophical Stance in the Lucullus’. In: Inwood, & Mansfeld, 1997: 36–57.Google Scholar

Görler, W. (2004). Kleine Schriften zur hellenistisch-römischen Philosophie. Leiden.Google Scholar

Graham, D.W. 2003, ‘Does Nature Love to Hide? Heraclitus B123 DK’. Classical Philology 98: 175–9.Google Scholar

Graham, D.W. (2013). ‘Once More unto the Stream’. In: Sider, & Obbink, 2013: 303–20.Google Scholar

Graßhoff, G., & Meyer, M. (eds.) (2016). Representing Authority in Ancient Knowledge Texts. Special issue of eTopoi Journal of Ancient Studies, 6.Google Scholar

Griffin, Michael (2014). ‘Hypostasizing Socrates’. In: Layne, & Tarrant, 2014: 97–108.Google Scholar

Griffin, Michael (2015a). Aristotle’s “Categories” in the Early Roman Empire. Oxford.Google Scholar

Griffin, Michael (ed.) (2015b). Olympiodorus. Life of Plato and On Plato First Alcibiades 1–9. London.Google Scholar

Griffin, Miriam (1997). ‘The Composition of the Academica: Motives and Versions’. In: Inwood, & Mansfeld, 1997: 3–32.Google Scholar

Griffin, Miriam & Barnes, J. (eds.) (1989). Philosophia Togata I. Oxford.Google Scholar

Griffin, Miriam & Barnes, J. (eds.) (1997). Philosophia Togata II. Oxford.Google Scholar

Griffiths, A. (2016). ‘Navel-Gazing in Naples? The Painting Behind the “Pompeii Philosophers”’. Syllecta Classica 27: 151–66.Google Scholar

Hadot, I. (ed.) (1990). Simplicius. Commentaire sur les catégories, Vol. 1. Leiden.Google Scholar

Hadot, I. (ed.) (2015). Athenian and Alexandrian Neoplatonism and the Harmonization of Aristotle and Plato. Leiden.Google Scholar

Hadot, P. (1981). ‘Ouranos, Kronos and Zeus in Plotinus’ Treatise against the Gnostics’. In: Blumenthal, H. J. & Markus, R.A. (eds.) Neoplatonism and Early Christian Thought. Essays in Honour of A.H. Armstrong. London: 124–38.Google Scholar

Hahm, D.E. (1977). The Origin of Stoic Cosmology. Columbus.Google Scholar

Hahm, D.E. (2007). ‘Critolaus and Late Hellenistic Peripatetic Philosophy’. In: Ioppolo, & Sedley, 2007: 47–101.Google Scholar

Hankinson, R.J. (1985). The Skeptics. London.Google Scholar

Hatzimichali, M. (2011). Potamo of Alexandria and the Emergence of Eclecticism. Oxford.Google Scholar

Hatzimichali, M. (2013). ‘The Texts of Plato and Aristotle in the I century BC’. In: Schofield, 2013: 1–27.Google Scholar

Helmig, Ch. (2009). ‘The Truth Can Never Be Refuted: Syrianus’ Views on Aristotle Reconsidered’. In: Longo, A. (ed.) Syrianus et la métaphysique de l’antiquité tardive. Naples: 347–80.Google Scholar

Henry, P. & Schwyzer, H.-R. (eds.) (1983). Plotini opera, Vol. III (editio minor). Oxford.Google Scholar

Heßler, J.E. (2018). ‘Plato, Hyperides, and Hellenistic Cult Practice. On the Commemoration of the Dead in the School of Epicurus’. Mnemosyne 71: 408–33.Google Scholar

Hicks, R.D. (ed.) (1925). Diogenes Laertius. Lives of Eminent Philosophers. Cambridge, MA & London.Google Scholar

Hoffmann, Ph. (1998). ‘La fonction des prologues exégétiques dans la pensée pédagogique néoplatonicienne’. In: Dubois, J.-D. & Roussel, B. (eds.) Entrer en matière: Les prologues. Paris: 209–45.Google Scholar

Horky, Ph. (2013). ‘Theophrastus on Platonic and “Pythagorean” imitation’. Classical Quarterly 63: 686–712.Google Scholar

Huffman, C. (2005). Archytas of Tarentum. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Huffman, C. (2014a). ‘The Peripatetics on the Pythagoreans’. In: Huffman, 2014b: 274–95.Google Scholar

Huffman, C. (ed.) (2014b). A History of Pythagoreanism. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Inwood, B. (2007). Seneca: Selected Philosophical Letters. Oxford.Google Scholar

Inwood, B. (2012). ‘Antiochus’ Physics’. In: Sedley, 2012a: 188–219.Google Scholar

Inwood, B. & Mansfeld, J. (eds.) (1997). Assent and Argument: Studies in Cicero’s ‘Academic Books’. Leiden.Google Scholar

Ioppolo, A.M. (1980). Aristone di Chio e lo Stoicismo antico. Naples.Google Scholar

Ioppolo, A.M. (1986). Opinione e scienza. Il dibattito tra Stoici e Accademici nel terzo e secondo secolo a.C. Naples.Google Scholar

Ioppolo, A.M. (1990). ‘Presentation and Assent: a Physical and Cognitive Problem in Early Stoicism’. Classical Quarterly 40: 433–49 = Ioppolo 2013: 137–58.Google Scholar

Ioppolo, A.M. (1995). ‘Socrate nelle tradizioni accademico-scettica e pirroniana’. In Giannantoni, G. et al. (eds.) La tradizione socratica. Naples: 89–123 = Ioppolo 2009: 209–40.Google Scholar

Ioppolo, A.M. (1997). ‘Fidelity to Zeno’s Theory’. In: Moutsopoulos, E.A. (ed.) Chypre et les origines du stoïcisme. Diotima 25: 62–73 = Ioppolo 2013: 181–92.Google Scholar

Ioppolo, A.M. (2000). ‘Su alcune recenti interpretazioni dello scetticismo dell'Accademia. Plutarch Adv. Col. 26.1121F–1122F: una testimonianza su Arcesilao’. Elenchos 21: 333–60.Google Scholar

Ioppolo, A.M. (2004). ‘La posizione di Plutarco nei confronti dello scetticismo’. In Gallo, I. (ed.) La biblioteca di Plutarco. Naples: 289–310.Google Scholar

Ioppolo, A.M. (2008). ‘Arcésilas dans le Lucullus de Cicéron’. Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale 1: 21–44 = Ioppolo 2013: 251–70.Google Scholar

Ioppolo, A.M. (2009). La testimonianza di Sesto Empirico sull’Accademia scettica. Naples.Google Scholar

Ioppolo, A.M. (2013). Dibattiti filosofici ellenistici. Dottrina delle cause, Stoicismo, Accademia scettica. ed. Centrone, B., Chiaradonna, R., Quarantotto, D., Spinelli, E.. Sankt Augustin.Google Scholar

Ioppolo, A.M. (2018). ‘Arcesilaus’. In Machuca, D. & Reed, B. (eds.) Skepticism from Antiquity to the Present. New York: 36–50.Google Scholar

Ioppolo, A.M. & Sedley, D. (eds.) (2007). Pyrrhonists, Patricians, Platonizers: Hellenistic Philosophy in the Period 155–86 bc. Naples.Google Scholar

Irwin, Th. (2012). ‘Antiochus, Aristotle and the Stoics on Degrees of Happiness’. In: Sedley, 2012a: 151–72.Google Scholar

Isnardi Parente, M. (ed.) (1980). Speusippo. Frammenti. Naples.Google Scholar

Isnardi Parente, M. (ed.) (2012). Senocrate e Ermodoro. Testimonianze e frammenti, 2nd ed., ed. Dorandi, T.. Pisa.Google Scholar

Jackson, R., Lycos, K. & Tarrant, H. (eds.) (1998). Olympiodorus: Commentary on Plato’s Gorgias. Leiden.Google Scholar

Jourdan, F. (2015). ‘Eusèbe de Césarée et les extraits de Numénius dans la Préparation Évangélique’. In: Morlet, S. (ed.) Lire en extraits, Lecture et production des textes de l’Antiquité à la fin du Moyen-Âge. Paris: 107–48.Google Scholar

Jourdan, F. (2017–2018). ‘Sur le Bien de Numénius: L’enseignement oral de Platon comme occasion de rechercher son pythagorisme dans ses écrits’. Chôra 15–16: 139–65.Google Scholar

Kahn, Ch. (1979). The Art and Thought of Heraclitus. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Kahn, Ch. (1996). Plato and the Socratic Dialogue. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Kahn, Ch. (2001). Pythagoras and the Pythagoreans. A Brief History. Indianapolis & Cambridge.Google Scholar

Karamanolis, G. (2004). ‘Porphyry: The First Platonist Commentator on Aristotle’. In: Adamson, et al. 2004: 97–120.Google Scholar

Karamanolis, G. (2006). Plato and Aristotle in Agreement? Platonists on Aristotle from Antiochus to Porphyry. Oxford.Google Scholar

Karamanolis, G. (2013). ‘Numenius’. In: The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/numenius/.Google Scholar

Karamanolis, G. (2014). ‘The Platonism of Eusebius of Caesarea’. In: Fowler, R. (ed.) Plato in the Third Sophistic. Berlin & New York: 171–91.Google Scholar

Kirk, G.S., Raven, J. & Schofield, M. (eds.) (1983). The Presocratic Philosophers. Cambridge.Google Scholar

König, J., & Woolf, G. (eds.) (2017). Authority and Expertise in Ancient Scientific Culture, Cambridge.Google Scholar

Lakmann, M.-L. (ed.) (2017). Platonici minores, 1. Jh.v.Chr. - 2. Jh.n.Chr. Prosopographie, Fragmente und Testimonien, mit deutscher Übersetzung. Leiden.Google Scholar

Laks, A. (2010). ‘Éclairer l’obscurité. Brucker et le syncrétisme platonicien’. In: Neschke, A. (ed.) Argumenta in dialogos Platonis, Vol. I. Basel: 352–69.Google Scholar

Larsen, B.D. (ed.) (1972). Jamblique de Chalcis: exégète et philosophe. Aarhus.Google Scholar

Layne, D. (2014). ‘The Character of Socrates and the Good of Dialogue Form’. In: Layne, & Tarrant, 2014: 80–96.Google Scholar

Layne, D. & Tarrant, H. (2014). The Neoplatonic Socrates. Philadelphia.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lernould, A. (2001). Physique et Théologie. Lecture du Timée de Platon par Proclus. Villeneuve d’Ascq.Google Scholar

Lernould, A. (2006). ‘Sur la composition de l’E de Delphes de Plutarque’. In: Boulogne, et al. 2006: 17–29.Google Scholar

Lévy, C. (2001). ‘Pyrrhon, Enésidème et Sextus Empiricus: la question de la légitimation historique dans le scepticisme’. In Brancacci, A. (ed.) Antichi e moderni nella filosofia di età imperiale. Naples: 299–329.Google Scholar

Lévy, C. (ed.) (2014). Présocratiques Latines. Traductions. Introductions et commentaires. Paris.Google Scholar

Linguiti, A. (2014). ‘Physics and Metaphysics’. In: Remes, & Slaveva-Griffin, 2014b: 343–55.Google Scholar

Long, A.A. (1975–1976). ‘Heraclitus and the Stoics’. Philosophia 5–6: 133–56 = Long 1996: 35–57.Google Scholar

Long, A.A. (1986). ‘Diogenes Laertius, Life of Arcesilaus’. Elenchos 7: 429–50 = ‘Arcesilaus in His Time and Place’ in Long, 2006: 96–113.Google Scholar

Long, A.A. (1996). Stoic Studies. Berkeley, Los Angeles & London.Google Scholar

Long, A.A. (1999). ‘Stoic Psychology’. In: Algra, et al. 1999: 560–84.Google Scholar

Long, A.A. (2006). From Epicurus to Epictetus. Oxford & New York.Google Scholar

Long, A.A. (2013). ‘Heraclitus on Measure and the Explicit Emergence of Rationality’. In Sider, & Obbink, 2013: 201–23.Google Scholar

Longo, A. (ed.) (2009). Syrianus et la métaphysique de l’Antiquité tardive. Actes du colloque international, Université de Genève, 29 septembre – 1er octobre 2006. Naples.Google Scholar

Longo, A. (ed.) (2017). ‘Numénius d'Apamée précurseur de Plotin dans l’allégorèse de la théogonie d'Hésiode: le mythe de Kronos, Ouranos et Zeus’. In: Gavray, M.-A. & Michalewski, A. (eds.) Les principes cosmologiques du platonisme: Origines, influences et systématisation. Turnhout: 167–85.Google Scholar

Longo, A. (ed.) (2020). ‘What is the Principle of Movement, the Self-moved (Plato) or the Unmoved (Aristotle)? The Exegetic Strategies of Hermias of Alexandria and Simplicius in Late Antiquity’. In: J.F. Finamore, C.-P. Manolea & S. Klitenic Wear (eds.) Studies in Hermias’ Commentary on Plato’s Phaedrus. Leiden & Boston: 115–41.Google Scholar

Lucarini, C.M. & Moreschini, C. (eds.) (2012). Hermias Alexandrinus. In Platonis Phaedrum Scholia. Berlin.Google Scholar

Luna, C. (ed.) (2001). Simplicius. Commentaire sur les Catégories d’Aristote. Chapitres 2–4. Paris.Google Scholar

Luna, C. & Segonds, A.Ph. (eds.) (2007–2017). Proclus. Commentaire sur le Parménide de Platon. Texte établi, traduit et annoté. 6 vols. Paris.Google Scholar

Luna, C. & Segonds, A.Ph. (eds.) (2007a). Proclus. Commentaire sur le Parménide de Platon, Vol. 1.1: Introduction générale. Paris.Google Scholar

Luna, C. & Segonds, A.Ph. (eds.) (2007b). Proclus. Commentaire sur le Parménide de Platon, Vol. 1.2: Livre I. Paris.Google Scholar

Luna, C. & Segonds, A.Ph. (eds.) (2013). Proclus. Commentaire sur le Parmánide de Platon, Vol. 4.2: Notes complémentaires et index du livre IV. Paris.Google Scholar

Mansfeld, J. (1992). Heresiography in Context. Hippolytus’ Elenchos as a Source for Greek Philosophy. Leiden.Google Scholar

Mansfeld, J. (1994). Prolegomena. Questions to Be Settled Before the Study of an Author, Or a Text. Leiden.Google Scholar

Mansfeld, J. (2010). ‘Plato, Pythagoras, Aristotle, the Peripatetics, the Stoics, and Thales and His Followers “On Causes”’. In J. Mansfeld & D.T. Runia (eds.). Aëtiana, Vol. III: Studies in the Doxographical Traditions of Ancient Philosophy. Leiden & Boston: 377–413 (previosuly published in Brancacci, A. (ed.) Antichi e moderni nella filosofia di età imperiale. Naples 2001: 17–68).Google Scholar

Marcovich, M. (ed.) (2001). Heraclitus: Greek Text with a Short Commentary. Sankt Augustin.Google Scholar

Marg, W. (ed.) (1972). Timaeus Locrus, De Natura Mundi et Animae. Überlieferung, Testimonia, Text und Übersetzung. Leiden.Google Scholar

Mathieu, J.-M. (2007). ‘La connaissance de Dieu comme navigation en haute mer: en remontant de Grégoire de Nazianze vers Platon’. In: Laurent, J. (ed.) Les dieux de Platon. Caen: 251–61.Google Scholar

Mattusch, C. (2008.) Pompeii and the Roman Villa. London.Google Scholar

Mayhew, R. (ed.) (2008). Plato. Laws 10. Oxford.Google Scholar

Mayor, A. (2018). Gods and Robots: Myths, Machines, and Ancient Dreams of Technology. Princeton.Google Scholar

McCabe, M.M. (1996). ‘Unity in the Parmenides: The Unity of the Parmenides’. In: Gill, C. & McCabe, M.M. (eds.) Form and Argument in Late Plato. Oxford: 5–47.Google Scholar

McDowell, J. (ed.) (1973). Plato. Theaetetus. Oxford.Google Scholar

Meerwaldt, J.D. (1951). ‘Cleanthea I’. Mnemosyne 4: 40–69.Google Scholar

Menn, S. (2002). ‘Aristotle’s Definition of Soul and the Programme of the De Anima’. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 22: 83–139.Google Scholar

Menn, S. (2012). ‘Self-Motion and Reflection: Hermias and Proclus on the Harmony of Plato and Aristotle on the Soul’. In: Wilberding, & Horn, 2012: 44–67.Google Scholar

Menn, S. (2013). ‘Avicenna’s Metaphysics’. In: Adamson, P. (ed.) Interpreting Avicenna: Critical Essays. Cambridge: 143–69.Google Scholar

Michalewski, A. (2012). ‘Le Premier de Numénius et l’Un de Plotin’. Archives de Philosophie, 75: 29–48.Google Scholar

Michalewski, A. (2014). La puissance de l’intelligible. La théorie plotinienne des Formes au miroir de l’héritage médioplatonicien. Leuven.Google Scholar

Michalewski, A. (2017). ‘Faut-il préférer Epicure à Aristote ? Quelques réflexions sur la providence’. In: Baghdassarian, & Guyomarc’h, 2017: 123–42.Google Scholar

Moraux, P. (1984). Der Aristotelismus bei den Griechen von Andronikos bis Alexander von Aphrodisias, II. Der Aristotelismus im I. und II. Jh.n.Ch. Berlin & New York.Google Scholar

Moraux, P. (1985). ‘Porphyre, commentateur de la Physique d’Aristote’. In: Rutten, Ch. & Motte, A. (eds.) Aristotelica: Mélanges offerts à Marcel de Corte. Brussels: 227–39.Google Scholar

Moreschini, C. (ed.) (1997). Plutarco: L’E di Delfi. Naples.Google Scholar

Morlet, S. (2015). ‘“Extraire” dans la littérature antique’. In: Morlet, S. (ed.) Lire en extraits: Lecture et production des textes de l’Antiquité à la fin du Moyen-Âge. Paris: 29–52.Google Scholar

Morrow, G.R. & Dillon, J.M. (eds.) (1987). Proclus’ Commentary on Plato’s Parmenides. Princeton.Google Scholar

Noble, Ch. (2013). ‘Plotinus’ Unaffectable Matter’. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 44: 233–77.Google Scholar

Noble, Ch. (2016). ‘Plotinus’ Unaffectable Soul’. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 51: 231-81.Google Scholar

O’Brien, C.S. (2015). The Demiurge in Ancient Thought. Cambridge.Google Scholar

O’Brien, D. (1996). ‘Plotinus on Matter and Evil’. In: Gerson, L.P. (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Plotinus. Cambridge: 171–95.Google Scholar

O’Meara, D.J. (1989). Pythagoras Revived: Mathematics and Philosophy in Late Antiquity. Oxford.Google Scholar

O’Meara, D.J. (2003). Platonopolis. Platonic Political Philosophy in Late Antiquity. Oxford.Google Scholar

O’Neill, W. (ed.) (1965). Proclus: Alcibiades 1. A Translation and Commentary. The Hague.Google Scholar

Obsieger, H. (ed.) (2013). Plutarch. De E apud Delphos. Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Opsomer, J. (1998). In Search of the Truth. Academic Tendencies in Middle Platonism. Brussel.Google Scholar

Opsomer, J. (2005a). ‘Demiurges in Early Imperial Platonism’. In: Hirsch-Luipold, R. (ed.) Gott und die Götter bei Plutarch. Berlin: 51–99.Google Scholar

Opsomer, J. (2005b). ‘A Craftsman and His Handmaiden. Demiurgy According to Plotinus’. In: Leinkauf, T. & Steel, C. (eds.) Plato’s Timaeus and the Foundations of Cosmology in Late Antiquity, the Middle Ages and Renaissance. Leuven: 67–102.Google Scholar

Opsomer, J. (2006a): ‘To Find the Maker and Father. Proclus’ Exegesis of Tim. 28C3–5’. Études Platoniciennes 2: 261–83.Google Scholar

Opsomer, J. (2006b). ‘Éléments stoïciens dans le De E apud Delphos de Plutarque’. In Boulogne, et al. 2006: 148–70.Google Scholar

Opsomer, J. (2009a). ‘M. Annius Ammonius, A Philosophical Profile’. In: Bonazzi, & Opsomer, 2009: 123–86.Google Scholar

Opsomer, J. (2009b). ‘The Integration of Aristotelian Physics in a Neoplatonic Context: Proclus on Movers and Divisibility’. In: Chiaradonna, R. & Trabattoni, F. (eds.) Physics and Philosophy of Nature in Greek Neoplatonism. Leiden & Boston: 189–229.Google Scholar

Opsomer, J. (2010). ‘Arguments non-linéaires et pensées en cercles. Forme et argumentation dans les Questions Platoniciennes de Plutarque’. In Brouillette, & Giavatto, 2010: 93–116.Google Scholar

Opsomer, J. (2012). ‘Self-Motion According to Iamblichus’. Elenchos 33: 259–90.Google Scholar

Opsomer, J. (2015). ‘A Much Misread Proposition from Proclus’ Elements of Theology (prop. 28)’. Classical Quarterly 65: 433–8.Google Scholar

Opsomer, J. & Ulacco, A. (2016). ‘What is Epistemic Authority? A Model and Some Examples from Ancient Philosophy’. In: Leemans, J., Meijns, B., Boodts, S. (eds.) Proceedings of the Leuven Conference ‘Shaping Authority’. Turnhout: 21–46.Google Scholar

Pearson, A.C. (1891). The Fragments of Zeno and Cleanthes. London.Google Scholar

Pépin, J. (1995). ‘Plotin et les mythes’. Revue Philosophique de Louvain 37: 5–27.Google Scholar

Perkams, M. (2006). ‘Das Prinzip der Harmonisierung verschiedener Traditionen in den neuplatonischen Kommentaren zu Platon und Aristoteles’. In: van Ackeren, M. & Müller, J. (eds.) Antike Philosophie verstehen – Understanding Ancient Philosophy. Darmstadt: 332–47.Google Scholar

Perkams, M. & Piccione, R.M. (eds.) (2006). Proklos: Methode, Seelenlehre, Metaphysik. Akten der Konferenz in Jena am 18.–20. September 2003. Leiden.Google Scholar

Petrucci, F.M. (ed.) (2012). Teone di Smirne. Expositio rerum mathematicarum ad legendum Platonem utilium. Introduzione, traduzione, commento. Sankt Augustin.Google Scholar

Petrucci, F.M. (ed.) (2014). ‘Le témoignage du deuxième livre du Commentaire au Timée de Proclus sur la forme des arguments médioplatoniciens au sujet de la genèse du monde’. Revue des Études Grecques 127: 331–75.Google Scholar

Petrucci, F.M. (ed.) (2016). ‘Théon de Smyrne’. In: Goulet, R. (ed.) Dictionnaire des Philosophes Antiques, Vol. VI. Paris: 1016–29.Google Scholar

Petrucci, F.M. (ed.) (2018). Taurus of Beirut: The Other Side of Middle Platonism. London & New York.Google Scholar

Planeaux, C. (2001). ‘Socrates, an Unreliable Narrator? The Dramatic Setting of the Lysis’. Classical Philology 96: 60–8.Google Scholar

Polanski, R.M. (1992). Philosophy and Knowledge: A Commentary on Plato's Theaetetus. London & Toronto.Google Scholar

Pradeau, J.-F. (ed.) (2002). Héraclite. Fragments. [Citations et Témoignages]. Paris.Google Scholar

Rackham, H. (ed.) (1931). Cicero: De finibus bonorum et malorum. Cambridge, MA & London.Google Scholar

Rackham, H. (ed.) (1967). Cicero: De natura deorum, Academica. Cambridge, MA & London.Google Scholar

Radke, G. (2006). Das Lächeln des Parmenides. Proklos’ Interpretationen zur Platonischen Dialogform. Berlin & New York.Google Scholar

Rapp, Ch. (2017). ‘His Dearest Enemy. Heraclitus in the Aristotelian Oeuvre’. In: Fantino, E. et al. (eds.) Heraklit im Kontext. Studia praesocratica, 8. Berlin & Boston: 415–38.Google Scholar

Rashed, M. (ed.) (2011). Alexandre d'Aphrodise, Commentaire perdu à la Physique d’Aristote: Livres IV–VIII. Les scholies byzantines. Berlin & Boston.Google Scholar

Rashed, M. (2013a). ‘La mosaïque des philosophes de Naples: une représentation de l’académie platonicienne et son commanditaire’. In: Noirot, C. & Ondine, N. (eds.) Omnia in uno: Hommage à Alain Segonds. Paris, 27–49.Google Scholar

Rashed, M. (2013b). ‘Boethus’ Aristotelian Ontology’. In: Schofield, 2013: 53–77. Reprinted with changes in R. Sorabji (ed.) (2016). Aristotle Re-Interpreted: New Findings on Seven Hundred Years of the Ancient Commentators. London: 103–23.Google Scholar

Rashed, M. (2016). ‘Proclus, commentaire perdu sur la Palinodie du Phèdre: vestiges byzantins’. In: L’héritage aristotélicien. Textes inédits de l'Antiquité. Nouvelle édition revue et augmentée. Paris: 473–561.Google Scholar

Rashed, M. (2018). La jeune fille et la sphère: études sur Empédocle. Paris.Google Scholar

Rashed, M. & Auffret, Th. (2014). ‘Aristote, Métaphysique A 6, 988a 7–14, Eudore d’Alexandrie et l’histoire ancienne du texte de la Métaphysique’. In: Brockmann, Ch., Deckers, D., Koch, L. & Valente, S. (eds.) Handschriften- und Textforschung heute. Zur Überlieferung der griechischen Literatur: Festschrift für Dieter Harlfinger aus Anlass seines 70. Geburtstages. Wiesbaden: 55–84.Google Scholar

Reid, J. (1885). M. Tulli Ciceronis Academica: The Text Revised and Explained. London.Google Scholar

Remes, P. & Slaveva-Griffin, S. (2014a). ‘Introduction: Neoplatonism Today’. In: Remes, & Slaveva-Griffin, 2014b: 1–10.Google Scholar

Remes, P. & Slaveva-Griffin, S. (eds.) (2014b). The Routledge Handbook of Neoplatonism. London & New York.Google Scholar

Renaud, F. & Tarrant, H. (eds.) (2015). The Platonic Alcibiades I: The Dialogue and Its Ancient Reception. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Reydams-Schils, G. (1999). Demiurge and Providence. Stoic and Platonist Readings of Plato’s Timaeus. Turnhout.Google Scholar

Reydams-Schils, G. (2007). ‘Calcidius on God’. In: Bonazzi, & Helmig, 2007: 243–58.Google Scholar

Reydams-Schils, G. & Ferrari, F. (2014). ‘Middle Platonism and Its Relation to Stoicism and the Peripatetic Tradition’. In: Remes & Slaveva-Griffin 2014b: 40–51.Google Scholar

Richards, H. (1901). ‘On a Greek Adverb of Place’. Classical Review 15: 442–5.Google Scholar

Richter, G.M.A. (1965). The Portraits of the Greeks. London.Google Scholar

Riedweg, Ch. (1987). Mysterienterminologie bei Platon, Philon und Klemens von Alexandrien. Berlin & New York.Google Scholar

Riedweg, Ch. (1997). ‘“Pythagoras hinterliess keine einzige Schrift”. Ein Irrtum?’ Museum Helveticum 54: 65–92.Google Scholar

Riginos, A.S. (1976). Platonica: The Anecdotes Concerning the Life and Writings of Plato. Leiden.Google Scholar

Rohde, E. (1872). ‘Die Quellen des Jamblichus in seiner Biographie des Pythagoras’. Rheinisches Museum für Philologie 27: 23–62.Google Scholar

Romano, F. (1985). Porfirio e la fisica aristotelica. Catania.Google Scholar

Runia, D.T. (1986). Philo of Alexandria and the Timaeus of Plato. Leiden & New York & Cologne.Google Scholar

Runia, D.T. (2001). Philo of Alexandria. On the Creation of the Cosmos According to Moses. Leiden, New York & Cologne.Google Scholar

Runia, D.T. & Share, M. (eds.) (2008). Proclus. Commentary on Plato’s Timaeus, Vol. II.2, Proclus on the Causes of the Cosmos and its Creation. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Rutherford, R.B. (1995). The Art of Plato. London.Google Scholar

Sambursky, S. (1959). Physics of the Stoics. London.Google Scholar

Schibli, H. (1993). ‘Xenocrates’ Daimons and the Irrational Soul’. Classical Quarterly 43: 143–67.Google Scholar

Schofield, M. (2012). ‘Antiochus on Social Virtue’. In: Sedley, 2012a: 173–87.Google Scholar

Schofield, M. (ed.) (2013). Aristotle, Plato and Pythagoreanism in the I century bc. New Directions for Philosophy. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Schofield, M. (ed.) (2014). ‘Archytas’. In: Huffman, 2014b: 69–87.Google Scholar

Schoppe, C. (1994). Plutarchs Interpretation der Ideenlehre Platons. Münster & Hamburg.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (1981). ‘The End of the Academy’. Phronesis 26: 67–75.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (1982). ‘The Stoic Criterion of Identity’. Phronesis 27: 259–75.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (1985). ‘The Stoic Theory of Universals’. In: Epp, R.H. (ed.) Recovering the Stoics. The Southern Journal of Philosophy 23, Supplement: 87–92.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (1989). ‘Philosophical Allegiance in the Greco-Roman World’. In: Griffin, & Barnes, 1989: 97–119.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (1992). ‘Sextus Empiricus and the Atomist Criteria of Truth’. Elenchos 13: 19–56.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (1997). ‘Plato’s Auctoritas and the Rebirth of the Commentary Tradition’. In: Griffin, & Barnes, 1997: 110–29.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (1999). ‘The Stoic-Platonist Debate on Kathēkonta’. In Ierodiakonou, K. (ed.) Topics in Stoic Philosophy. Oxford: 128–52.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (2002a). ‘The Origins of Stoic God’. In: Frede, D. & Laks, A. (eds.) Traditions of Theology. Leiden: 41–83.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (2002b). The Midwife of Platonism. Text and Subtext in Plato’s Theaetetus, Oxford.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (2003a). Plato’s Cratylus. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (2003b). ‘The School, from Zeno to Arius Didymus’. In: Inwood, B. (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to the Stoics. Cambridge: 7–32.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (2003c). ‘Philodemus and the Decentralisation of Philosophy’. Cronache Ercolanesi 33: 31–41.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (ed.) (2012a). The Philosophy of Antiochus. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (2012b). ‘Antiochus as Historian of Philosophy’. In: Sedley, 2012a: 80–103.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (2017). ‘Divinization’. In: Destrée, P. & Giannopoulou, Z. (eds.) Plato’s Symposium: A Critical Guide. Cambridge: 66–107.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (2019). ‘The Timaeus as Vehicle for Platonic Doctrine’. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 56: 45–71.Google Scholar

Segonds, A.Ph. (ed.) (1985). Proclus. Sur le premier Alcibiade de Platon, Vol. 1. Paris.Google Scholar

Sharples, R.W. & Sorabji, R. (eds.) (2007). Greek and Roman Philosophy 100 bc–200 ad. London.Google Scholar

Sheppard, A. (1980). Studies on the 5th and 6th Essays of Proclus’ Commentary on the Republic. Göttingen.Google Scholar

Sheppard, A. (2013). ‘Proclus’ Place in the Reception of Plato’s Republic’. In: Sheppard, A. (ed.) Ancient Approaches to Plato’s Republic. London: 107–15.Google Scholar

Sheppard, A. (2014). The Poetics of Phantasia. London.Google Scholar

Sheppard, A. (Forthcoming). ‘Allegory, Metaphysics, Theology: Homeric Reception in Athenian Neoplatonism’. In: Manolea, C.-P. (ed.) The Brill’s Companion to the Reception of Homer from the Hellenistic Age to Late Antiquity. Leiden.Google Scholar

Sider, D. & Obbink, D. (eds.) (2013). Doctrine and Doxography: Studies on Heraclitus and Pythagoras. Berlin & Boston.Google Scholar

Simonetti, E.G. (2017). A Perfect Medium? Oracular Divination in the Thought of Plutarch. Leuven.Google Scholar

Siorvanes, L. (1996). Proclus: Neoplatonic Philosophy and Science. Edinburgh.Google Scholar

Smith, A. (ed.) (1992). Porphyrii Philosophi fragmenta: Fragmenta Arabica David Wasserstein interpretante. Stuttgart & Leipzig.Google Scholar

Smith, A. (ed.) (2012). ‘The Significance of “Physics” in Porphyry: The Problem of Body and Matter’. In: Wilberding, & Horn, 2012: 30–43.Google Scholar

Sorabji, R. (ed.) (2004). The Philosophy of the Commentators 200–600 ad. A Sourcebook, Vol. 1: Psychology. London.Google Scholar

Sorabji, R. (ed.) (2014). ‘The Alexandrian Classrooms Excavated and Sixth-Century Philosophy Teaching’. In: Remes, & Slaveva-Griffin, 2014b: 30–9.Google Scholar

Spinelli, E. (2010). ‘Presocratici scettici? Assunti genealogici nel Varro di Cicerone’. In: Giombini, S. & Marcacci, F. (eds.) Il quinto secolo. Studi di filosofia antica in onore di Livio Rossetti. Passignano sul Trasimeno: 235–46.Google Scholar

Staab, G. (2009). ‘Das Kennzeichen des Neuen Pythagoreismus innerhalb der kaiserzeitlichen Platoninterpretation: “Pythagoreischer” Dualismus und Einprinzipienlehre im Einklang’. In: Bonazzi, & Opsomer, 2009: 55–88.Google Scholar

Staab, G. (2014). ‘Der hymnische Nachruf des Proklos auf seinen Lehrer Syrianos (IG II/III² 13451) im Lichte des Athener Neuplatonismus’. Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 190: 81–96.Google Scholar

Steel, C. (2003). ‘Why Should We Prefer Plato’s Timaeus to Aristotle’s Physics? Proclus’ Critique of Aristotle’s Causal Explanation of the World’. In: Sharples, R.W. & Sheppard, A. (eds.) Ancient Approaches to Plato’s Timaeus. London: 175–87.Google Scholar

Steel, C. et al. (eds.) (2007–2009). Proclus: In Platonis Parmenidem commentaria. 3 vols. Oxford.Google Scholar

Syme, R. (1972). ‘Fraud and Imposture’. In: von Fritz, K. (ed.) Pseudepigrapha I. Vandœuvres & Geneva: 1–17.Google Scholar

Szlezàk, Th.A. (1972). Pseudo-Archytas über Die Kategorien. Berlin & New York.Google Scholar

Tarán, L. (ed.) (1981). Speusippus of Athens: A Critical Study with a Collection of the Related Texts and Commentary. Leiden.Google Scholar

Tarán, L. (1999). ‘Heraclitus: The River-fragments and Their Implications’. Elenchos 20: 9–52 = in Collected Papers (1962–1999). Leiden 2001: 126–67.Google Scholar

Tarrant, H. (1985). Scepticism or Platonism? The Philosophy of the Fourth Academy. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Tarrant, H. (2000). Plato’s First Interpreters. Ithaca.Google Scholar

Tarrant, H. (2004). ‘Must Commentators Know Their Sources? Proclus In Timaeum and Numenius’. In: Adamson, et al. 2004: 175–90.Google Scholar

Tarrant, H. (2007). ‘Antiochus: A New Beginning?’ In: Sharples, & Sorabji, 2007: Vol. II, 317–32.Google Scholar

Tarrant, H. et al. (eds.) (2018). The Brill’s Companion to the Reception of Plato. Leiden, Boston & Cologne.Google Scholar

Thesleff, H. (1961). An Introduction to the Pythagorean Writings of the Hellenistic Period. Åbo.Google Scholar

Thesleff, H. (1962). ‘Okkelos, Archytas and Plato’. Eranos 60: 8–36.Google Scholar

Thesleff, H. (ed.) (1965). The Pythagorean Texts of the Hellenistic Period. Åbo.Google Scholar

Thompson, D’Arcy W. (1895). A Glossary of Greek Birds. Oxford.Google Scholar

Tieleman, T. (2007). ‘Panaetius’ Place in the History of Stoicism with Special Reference to his Moral Psychology’. In: Ioppolo, & Sedley, 2007: 103–41.Google Scholar

Tornau, Ch. (2006). ‘Der Eros und das Gute bei Plotin und Proklos’. In: Perkams, & Piccione, 2006: 201–29.Google Scholar

Trapp, M. (2000). ‘Plato in Dio’. In: Swain, S. (ed.) Dio Chrysostom. Politics, Letters, and Philosophy. Oxford: 213–39.Google Scholar

Trouillard, J. (1958). ‘Agir par son être même, la causalité selon Proclus’. Revue des sciences religieuses 118: 347–57.Google Scholar

Tsouni, G. (2018). ‘The Emergence of Platonic and Aristotelian Authority in the First Century bce’. In: Bryan, et al. 2018: 263–77.Google Scholar

Tsouni, G. (2019). Antiochus of Ascalon and Peripatetic Ethics. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Ulacco, A. (2017). Pseudopythagorica Dorica. I trattati di argomento metafisico, logico ed epistemologico attribuiti ad Archita e a Brontino. Berlin & New York.Google Scholar

Ulacco, A. & Opsomer, J. (2014). ‘Elements and Elemental Properties in Timaeus Locrus’. Rheinisches Museum für Philologie 157: 154–206.Google Scholar

Van den Berg, R.M. (2016). ‘Theurgy in the Context of Proclus’ Philosophy’. In: d’Hoine, & Martijn, 2016: 223–39.Google Scholar

Van den Berg, R.M. (2017). ‘Proclus and Damascius on φιλοτιμία: The Neoplatonic Psychology of a Political Emotion’. Philosophie antique 17: 149–65.Google Scholar

Van den Berg, R.M. (Forthcoming). ‘Imitation and Self-examination: The Later Neoplatonists on the Platonic Dialogue as Moral Education through Visualisation’. In: Xenophontos, S. & Marmodoro, A. (eds.) The Reception of Greek Ethics in Late Antiquity and Byzantium. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Vander Waerdt, P. (1989). ‘Colotes and the Epicurean Refutation of Skepticism’. Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 30: 225–67.Google Scholar

Van Nuffelen, P. (2011). Rethinking the Gods. Philosophical Readings of Religion in the Post-Hellenistic Period. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Warren, J. (2002). ‘Socratic Scepticism in Plutarch’s Adversus Colotem’. Elenchos 23: 333–56.Google Scholar

Westerink, L.G. (ed.) (1966). Olympiodorus. Commentary on the First Alcibiades of Plato. Amsterdam.Google Scholar

Westerink, L.G. (ed.) (1970). Olympiodori in Platonis Gorgiam commentaria. Leipzig.Google Scholar

Westerink, L.G. (ed.) (1990). Prolégomènes à la philosophie de Platon. Paris.Google Scholar

Whittaker, J. (1969). ‘Ammonius on the Delphic E’, Classical Quarterly 19: 185–92.Google Scholar

Whittaker, J. (1984). Studies in Platonism and Patristic Thought. London.Google Scholar

Whittaker, J. (ed.) (1990). Alcinoos: Enseignement des doctrines de Platon. Paris.Google Scholar

Whittaker, J. (2000). ‘Harpocration d’Argos’. In: Goulet, R. (ed.) Dictionnaire des philosophes antiques Vol. III. Paris: 503–4.Google Scholar

Wilberding, J. (2008). ‘Automatic Action in Plotinus’. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 34: 373–407.Google Scholar

Wilberding, J. & Horn, Ch. (eds.) (2012). Neoplatonism and the Philosophy of Nature. Oxford.Google Scholar

Wilson, R.J. (2006). ‘Aspects of Iconography in Romano-British Mosaics: The Rudston “Aquatic” Scene and the Brading Astronomer Revisited’. Britannia 37: 295–336.Google Scholar

Wycherley, R.E. (1962). ‘Peripatos: The Athenian Philosophical Scene-II’. Greece & Rome 9: 2–21.Google Scholar

Zambon, M. (2002). Porphyre et le moyen platonisme. Paris.Google Scholar

Zanker, P. (1995). The Mask of Socrates (English translation). Berkeley.Google Scholar

Zhmud, L. (2012). Pythagoras and the Early Pythagoreans. Oxford.Google Scholar

Zhmud, L. (2019). ‘What Is Pythagorean in the Pseudo-Pythagorean Literature?’. Philologus 163: 72–94.Google Scholar