A distinguished group of scholars of ancient philosophy here presents a systematic study of the twelfth book of Aristotle's Metaphysics. Lambda, which can be regarded as a self-standing treatise on substance, has been attracting particular attention in recent years, and was chosen as the focus of the fourteenth Symposium Aristotelicum, from which this volume derives.

The Seventh Platonic Letter describes Plato's attempts to turn the ruler of Sicily, Dionysius II, into a philosopher ruler along the lines of the Republic. It explains why Plato turned from politics to philosophy in his youth and how he then tried to apply his ideas to actual politics later on. It also sets out his views about language, writing and philosophy. As such, it represents a potentially crucial source of information about Plato, who tells us almost nothing about himself in his dialogues. But is it genuine? Scholars have debated the issue for centuries, although recent opinion has moved in its favour. The origin of this book was a seminar given in Oxford in 2001 by Myles Burnyeat and Michael Frede, two of the most eminent scholars of ancient philosophy in recent decades. Michael Frede begins by casting doubt on the Letter by looking at it from the general perspective of letter writing in antiquity, when it was quite normal to fabricate letters by famous figures from the past. Both then attack the authenticity of the letter head-on by showing how its philosophical content conflicts with what we find in the Platonic dialogues. They also reflect on the question of why the Letter was written, whether as an attempt to exculpate Plato from the charge of meddling in politics (Frede), or as an attempt to portray, through literary means, the ways in which human weakness and emotions can lead to disasters in political life (Burnyeat).

Lombardo and Bell have translated this important early dialogue on virtue, wisdom, and the nature of Sophistic teaching into an idiom remarkable for its liveliness and subtlety. Michael Frede has provided a substantial introduction that illuminates the dialogue's perennial interest, its Athenian political background, and the particular difficulties and ironic nuances of its argument.

Distinguished experts from a range of disciplines (Orientalists, philologists, philosophers, theologians, and historians) with a common interest in late antiquity probe the apparent paradox of pagan monotheism and reach a better understanding of the historical roots of Christianity.

The Historiography of Philosophy is the text, virtually unchanged, of the Nellie Wallace lectures, which Michael Frede gave in Oxford in 1989-90. In these lectures, Frede is largely concerned with how the history of philosophy has been studied and how it should be studied, that is, how we ought to conceive of and explain what historians of philosophy have been doing and should be doing. He distinguishes three systematical approaches to the history of philosophy, which run under the same heading 'history of philosophy' and deal with the same material, but they are distinct enterprises: Philosophical Doxography, Philosophical History of Philosophy, and Historical History of Philosophy. All three enterprises are considered by him as perfectly legitimate, but he clearly gives priority to the historical history of philosophy, since the other two ultimately have to rely on its findings; for it is only a historical discipline that can determine which position a philosopher of the past, as a matter of historical fact, took and for which reasons he did, in fact, take it. Frede starts his lectures by showing how the historical history of philosophy differs from the two philosophical studies of the history of philosophy; he then examines the historical discipline in more detail, and finally looks into the consequences of its practice. This volume also contains three previously published articles by Frede on the same topic, a preface by Katerina Ierodiakonou that places Frede's lectures in context, and a postface by Jonathan Barnes that discusses and criticizes Frede's views.

These five essays began a debate about the nature and scope of ancient scepticism which has transformed our understanding of what scepticism originally was. Together they provide a vigorous and highly stimulating introduction to the thought of the original sceptics, and shed new light on its relation to sceptical arguments in modern philosophy.

Where does the notion of free will come from? How and when did it develop, and what did that development involve? In Michael Frede's radically new account of the history of this idea, the notion of a free will emerged from powerful assumptions about the relation between divine providence, correctness of individual choice, and self-enslavement due to incorrect choice. Anchoring his discussion in Stoicism, Frede begins with Aristotle - who, he argues, had no notion of a free will - and ends with Augustine. Frede shows that Augustine, far from originating the idea (as is often claimed), derived most of his thinking about it from the Stoicism developed by Epictetus.

These five essays began a debate about the nature and scope of ancient scepticism which has transformed our understanding of what scepticism originally was. Together they provide a vigorous and highly stimulating introduction to the thought of the original sceptics, and shed new light on its relation to sceptical arguments in modern philosophy.

Distinguished experts from a range of disciplines with a common interest in late antiquity probe the apparent paradox of pagan monotheism, and reach a better understanding of the historical roots of Christianity.

Rationality in Greek Thought is a collection of specially written essays by leading international scholars re-examining ideas of reason and rationality in Plato, Aristotle, and other ancient thinkers. They show that ancient texts have often been misinterpreted through the influence of modern ideas of reason, and seek to redress the balance.

'All the essays are uniformly of high standard and together make a satisfying volume.' Myles Burnyeat, Times Higher Education Supplement

Rationality in Greek Thought, a collection of specially written essays by leading international scholars, re-examines ancient ideas of reason and rationality. Rationality in Greek Thought examines distinctive aspects of ancient conceptions of reason, sharpening awareness of the considerable conceptual change, and thus helping to remove a serious obstacle to a full understanding of ancient philosophical texts. At the same time, the essays stimulate a reassessment of our own ideas of reason and rationality, helping us set them in historical context and explore alternatives to them.

"Essays in Ancient Philosophy " was first published in 1987. Minnesota Archive Editions uses digital technology to make long-unavailable books once again accessible, and are published unaltered from the original University of Minnesota Press editions.

To understand ancient philosophy "in its concrete, complex detail," Michael Frede says, "one has also to look at all the other histories to which it is tied by an intricate web of casual connections which run both ways." Frede's distinctive approach to the history of ancient philosophy is closely tied to his specific interests within the field - the Hellenistic philosophers and those of late antiquity, who are the primary subjects of this book. Long ignored or even maligned, the Stoics and Skeptics, medical philosophers, and grammarians are extremely interesting once their actual views are reconstructed and it is possible to recognize their ties to earlier and later philosophical thought. Refusing to study them as paradigms of achievement, or to seek purely philosophical explanations for their views, Frede draws instead upon those "other histories"--of religion, social structure, law and politics--to illuminate their work and to show how it was interpreted and transformed by succeeding generations.

Where does the notion of free will come from? How and when did it develop, and what did that development involve? In Michael Frede's radically new account of the history of this idea, the notion of a free will emerged from powerful assumptions about the relation between divine providence, correctness of individual choice, and self-enslavement due to incorrect choice. Anchoring his discussion in Stoicism, Frede begins with Aristotle - who, he argues, had no notion of a free will - and ends with Augustine. Frede shows that Augustine, far from originating the idea (as is often claimed), derived most of his thinking about it from the Stoicism developed by Epictetus.