ABSTRACT
The question of Plotinus’ influence is an extremely complex one. For one thing, the matter is insufficiently studied, even if a lot has been written on some aspects of it, for instance about the relationship between Plotinus and Augustine or Plotinus and later Neoplatonists. There is to date to my knowledge no substantial work, however, that seeks to account for Plotinus’ presence in the history of thought throughout the ages. The problem is aggravated by the fact that where one sees something in later thinkers that has a Plotinian ring this need not at all mean that Plotinus is the immediate source of it. After all his ancient Platonist successors, whom he undoubtedly greatly influenced, were often quite influential in their own right. St. Augustine (354–430), Proclus (412–485) and Pseudo-Dionysius (fifth–sixth century), a Christian Neoplatonist strongly influenced by Proclus—all had great impact on later thinkers. They were all, so to speak, marked for life, by Plotinus. More often than not one of these would be responsible for a Plotinian trait in later thinkers. Any claim about influence, if it is to count as anything more than free armchair association of ideas, has to be based on research that at least establishes who is likely to have read what. Naturally, this is often difficult. My suspicion is that Plotinus’ impact cuts much deeper than has generally been recognized. However, I shall not seek to justify this hunch in what follows but, at least for the most part, stick to what is obvious and well known.
