Journal of the History of Philosophy

296 JOURNAL OF THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY 3o:2 APRIL t99~ motives rather than philosophical principles.s Moreover, supposing Erskine is right, both men would still stand out as exceptions to the tendency for Stoics--and philosophers in general--to remain aloof from dangerous struggles by eschewing any active political role. Cicero thought Demetrius of Phalerum unique (Leg. 3-t4), and we have no reliable sign that Zeno, much less Cleanthes or Chrysippus, differed from the norm. Finally, even if some Stoics did help shape policy and events directly, it would not follow that they did so on Stoic principles, much less that any party or policy could claim a monopoly on Stoic support. Panaitius' more conventional views, rather than indicating apostasy, show that Stoicism had room for debate. Erskine explores the origins of Stoic ideas as well as their effects, and he tries throughout to set Stoic thought in its "historical context" (2). This approach is welcome, and it would be foolish to suppose that Stoics were untouched by current events. But Erskine tends to exaggerate the influence of political and economic pressures and to underestimate the importance of philosophical argument. Two questions frame the book: What first inspired Zeno's radical views, and why did the Middle Stoa abandon those views? About the philosophical motivation in each case Erskine has little to say: Zeno "attacked" Plato for preserving classes in his Republic (3o-33), and later Stoics yielded to Carneades' "vehement attack" (15o). Much more prominent are "external influences": Zeno was influenced by "the impact of Alexander," social and economic polarization within the city-states, and demands for autonomy throughout the Greek world (33-42); likewise, later Stoics were disillusioned with the failure of the Spartan revolutions, intimidated by Roman power, and seduced by Roman statesmen (15o, ~o81o ). Grand explanatory hypotheses like this are fashionable in some quarters, but I think they are worse than misleading in the history of philosophy. Zeno and his successors had carefully articulated reasons for their views, and unless we first understand those reasons better, it is pointless to speculate about the influence of sociopolitical factors. Nonetheless , although the book is short on philosophical analysis and reaches more conclusions than the evidence warrants, its wealth of historical detail sheds new light on Stoic political thought and shows that the subject deserves further study. STEPHEN A. WHITE The University of Texas at Austin and the Institute for Advanced Study Richard C. Dales. Medieval Discussions of the Eternity of the World. Brill's Studies in Intellectual History, Volume 18. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 199o. Pp. 304. Cloth, $7o.oo. Richard C. Dales has spent decades preparing this book. This is evident from the selfcitations in the introduction and in the select bibliography, beginning with articles back in 1971. It is also evident in the grand sweep of the work itself. The subject Of the s See D. R. Dudley,Journa/ofRomanStudies31 0941). Our sources also present Blossius not as directing Tiberius Gracchus but as ready to follow his every order. Erskine's case could perhaps be strengthened by continuing the tale to cover Blossius' role in the slave revolt led by Aristonicus; but cf. the healthy scepticism and cautionary tales in M. Griffin, "Philosophy, Politics, and Politicians ," esp. 55-28, in PhilosophiaTogata(Oxford, 1989). BOOK REVIEWS ~97 eternity of the world has been at the center of his life's research, and his broad command of the primary and secondary sources manifests itself in the present work and also in an already-published companion volume, done with O. Argerami, Medieval Latin Ttxt~ on the Eternity of the World (Brill, 1991 ). Professor Dales, like the artist in the Stephen Sondheim song, is "putting it together , piece by piece." In the present study, he provides a very helpful overview of the medieval discussions of the eternity of the world. Since the medievals respected their intellectual inheritance, even when Criticizing it, the work necessarily begins with Plato, Boethius, Augustine, Eriugena, Aristotle, Averroes, Avicenna, Algazel and Maimonides , each appearing in the order of their arrivals in the medieval treatises. These portraits, and the chapters on the medieval authors themselves, give a wellbalanced appreciation of various issues involved in the...